RAM AVTAR TYAGI Vs. STATE NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a criminal revision filed by the petitioner against the order dated 11. 2. 2008 passed by the learned MM, Delhi in criminal complaint No. 05/01 titled as Ram Avtar Tyagi Vs. Narinder Singh and Ors. By virtue of the aforesaid order, the learned Magistrate dismissed the application of the petitioner u/s 156 (3)of Cr. P. C. for referring the matter to the local police for the purpose of registration of an FIR for an offence of breach of trust and for conduct of the investigation.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case are that present petitioner filed a complaint against the respondents who are five in number making allegations that they had committed offences u/s 406/409/415/420/468/471/ 506/ 120b IPC. It was alleged that on 14. 8. 1996, an agreement to sell was executed by respondent no. 1 and his brother as a consequence of which both of them received a sum of Rs. 4 lacs in cash. It is alleged that the complainant was to pay a balance amount within 18 months from the date of agreement to sell and respondent no. 1 was to perfect the title of the petitioner. As a consequence of this agreement, the respondent no. 1 and his brother Rajender Singh are alleged to have executed documents like General power of Attorney, Will, Receipt etc. in favour of the complainant. It is further alleged that respondent no. 1 in conspiracy with respondent no. s 2 to 5 cancelled the General Power of attorney on 8. 1. 97 to grab the land in question. It is alleged that the complainant received a notice from respondent no. 1 on 10. 10. 2007 stating that respondent no. 1 has cancelled the power of attorney. On the basis of these facts, the complainant has filed an application for registration of the aforesaid offences against all the five respondents.

(3.) THE learned Magistrate on receipt of complaint called for the report of the sho of the concerned police station. The SHO of P. S. Swaroop Nagar gave a report to the effect that the aforesaid facts did not disclose the commission of any cognizable offence and on the contrary, it was a pure case of civil nature which was sought to be converted into a criminal case.