RAJESH BINDAL,J - (1.) THE prayer made in this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short "the Code") is for quashing FIR No. 132 dated August 6, 2005 registered under Sections 420 IPC at Police Station, Hariana District Hoshiarpur and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.
(2.) AT the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the same set of allegations were made against the petitioner as well as his wife Harpreet Kaur in the FIR in question and in Criminal Misc. No. 44335-M of 2005 (Harpreet Kaur v. State of Punjab and another, 2006(2) RCR(Criminal) 287) filed by wife of petitioner Harpreet Kaur, this Court vide order dated March 1, 2006 had already quashed the FIR. Facts in brief are that petitioner being General Power of Attorney of his son Lakhbir Singh entered into an agreement to sell on his behalf and on behalf of his son for sale of land measuring 120 kanals 16 marlas in favour of Harjit Kaur wife of Harjinder Singh, resident of village Mohal, P.S. Bhogpur, District Jalandhar for a consideration of Rs. 3,25,000/- per acre. Rs. 11 lacs was paid as earnest money. The sale deed was to be executed on or before January 31, 2002. In pursuance to the agreement to sell, sale deed for land measuring 103 kanals 16 marlas was registered in the name of Harjinder Singh husband of Harjit Kaur on January 5, 2001. However, the sale deed for the balance land was not registered. In January, 2003 Lakhbir Singh died. His share was inherited by his mother Harpreet Kaur and his widow Sukhwinder Kaur. The sale deed for the balance land i.e. 16 kanals 19 marlas was not got registered by the petitioner. Respondent No. 2 filed civil suit for specific performance, which is pending before the Civil Court at Hoshiarpur. The FIR in question was registered on August 6, 2005 with the allegations that in the month of January, 2005, the complainant came to know that the wife of the petitioner with his connivance mortgaged part of the land in question with the Primary Cooperative Agricultural Development Bank Limited, Hoshiarpur and has thus defrauded the complainant and further that they had hatched a criminal conspiracy by not executing the sale deed in their favour of the entire land, which they had agreed to sell. It has also come on record that the loan raised by the wife of the petitioner was settled in May, 2005 before the FIR was registered.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that as far as allegations against the petitioner are concerned, the same do not constitute an offence under Section 420 IPC under which the FIR was registered against him. Petitioner owned 103 kanals 16 marlas of land out of the total land measuring 120 kanals 16 marlas for which he had admittedly executed sale deed in favour of the complainant. This single fact is enough to conclude that intention of the petitioner was not to cheat the complainant. As far as balance land is concerned, the submission is that a suit for specific performance filed by respondent No. 2 is already pending. As regards the mortgage of the land is concerned, it is submitted that the same was done by the wife of the petitioner, who had become the owner of the land owned by her son Lakhbir Singh by way of inheritance and only thereafter it was mortgaged with the bank to raise a loan. However, before the FIR was registered taking such plea, even the loan had been settled on May 6, 2005.;