PRADEEP AGARWAL Vs. STATE REPRESENTED BY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition the petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.60/2017 under Sections 420/34 IPC registered at PS Crime Branch and the proceedings emanating therefrom. The above noted FIR was registered on the complaint of Ms. Seema Narayen, received at SER/Crime Branch. The complainant reported that she has been defrauded to the tune of Rs. 2.80 crores by a deep-rooted conspiracy perpetrated by Pradeep Agarwal (the petitioner herein) and his brother Praveen Agarwal. The complainant stated that the petitioner approached her in December 2009 and lured her to buy an independent floor in a three-storied residential project about to be constructed by them on a plot area of 504 sq. yards bearing No.X-19, Hauz Khas, New Delhi. The petitioner drew a rosy picture of the project and guaranteed that possession would be given in 24 months as the Building Plan was already sanctioned by MCD in the year 2008 and casually showed the sanctioned plan and a string of papers claiming that the plot was free from encumbrances and cajoled her to invest in the project.

(2.) In the same month, the petitioner repeatedly pressed her to invest in his project claiming that he was giving her a concessional price of Rs. 2.80 crores for the ground floor with the concession to pay in instalments as per her convenience. Relying on his representation and assurances, the complainant agreed to buy ground floor in their project at X-19, Hauz Khas, New Delhi. On 13th January, 2010, the petitioner brought an Agreement to Sell in respect of the ground floor of the above property and got signatures of the complainant in the presence of witnesses. The complainant then made a part payment of Rs. 21 lakh through cheques on 13th January, 2010.

(3.) However, no construction commenced at the site for two years. On persistent inquiries by the complainant, the petitioner started construction and in March, 2013, when the basic structure was ready the petitioner started demanding the remaining amount of Rs. 2.59 crores, which was also paid by the complainant through cheques. During that period, the complainant was also asking the petitioner to provide her the papers and the Agreement to Sell, which he had got signed on 13th January, 2010 but he only provided her the confirmation of the payment received by him and did not provide the agreement to sell document on the pretext that those were with his brother at Kolkata.