A P NARANG Vs. CBI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two revision petitions have been filed by the two office bearers of a Group Housing Society viz. M/s IRCON Employees CGHS Ltd. aggrieved by the order dated 17th February, 2010 directing framing of charge against the petitioners under Section 420/471/120-B IPC.

(2.) THIS Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 10006/2004 had directed CBI to investigate about the genuineness of societies to whom land had been allotted by the DDA. On the basis of these directions, an FIR was registered on 7th November, 2006 under provision of Prevention of Corruption Act alleging conspiracy of officials of Registrar of Cooperative Society and four office bearers of petitioner society including petitioners. CBI investigated into the affairs of the society and about the genuineness of the society and gave a finding that all the members of the society were genuine and no case under Prevention of Corruption Act was made out for allotment of land by DDA to the society on the basis of fraud or deception. However, while doing this investigation CBI considered that the resignation letter of one of the members viz. Mr. V.K.Talwar was not genuine and it was a forged document. There is no doubt that Mr. V.K.Talwar was a genuine member of the society. There is no dispute that apart from paying initial membership fee of Rs.100/- he did not make any payment to the society either towards purchase of land despite demand notices or subsequently during construction of the flats of the society towards construction. There is no dispute that there were several other members with similar position and they had resigned from the society and the Managing Committee of Society had sent a list of such members who had resigned from the society to Registrar. There is also no dispute to the fact that society had from time to time sent demand letters to Mr. V.K.Talwar and Mr. V.K.Talwar contributed "zero" amount towards construction or towards purchase of land. However, Mr. V.K.Talwar told CBI that the resignation letter on record of the society did not bear his signatures and was a forged letter. It is also not in dispute that Mr. V.K.Talwar had not made any complaint either to police or to any other authority that he was wrongfully not considered for allotment of the flat. It is on record that society constructed only 110 flats for those 110 members, who had made payment towards purchase of land as well as towards construction. Under these circumstances, the petitioner has stated that no offence of cheating was made out against the petitioners since essential ingredients of offence were not present.

(3.) AS far as offence under Section 471 IPC is concerned, it only seems that this prosecution was motivated. Mr. V.K.Talwar's resignation letter was forwarded to Registrar of Cooperative Society in 1998. From 1998 till 2006 when CBI filed its report Mr. V.K.Talwar himself had not complained about his resignation being forged. He was very well aware that he had not paid a single paisa towards construction of flats of the society. He knew that flats had come up and he was not being considered as member of the society. If he was aggrieved that his resignation was forged one, he would have complained to Registrar of Cooperative Society about this. It only seems that while CBI was investigating about the genuineness of the society, Mr. V.K.Talwar found it as an opportunity to claim a flat on the ground of alleged forgery of his resignation letter and made this complaint that his resignation letter was forged. Still it is not his case that at any point of time he had offered to the society the amount as demanded by the society. Under these circumstances, I consider that his stand of a forged resignation letter after such a long period was only a change of colours and nothing more.