S.D. KHANNA Vs. NAND LAL AGGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BRIG . Dr. S. D. Khanna (Retired) has filed this petition under section 482, Criminal Procedure Code, for quashing the complaint under section 420, Indian Penal Code, and the order dated March 23; 1989 passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Chandigarh, summoning the petitioner as an accused under section 420, Indian Penal Code.

(2.) THE facts leading to the filing of the complaint which is sought to be quashed in this case are that Smt. Kamla Khanna was allotted a two Kanal plot No. 64, in Sector 6, Panchkula in the year 1973. She expired in June, 1983, leaving behind the petitioner and a minor daughter Radhika Khanna as her legal heirs. After the death of his wife, the petitioner applied to the Estate Officer, HUDA, Panchkula, for transfer of plot in his name. This application was pending and in the meantime on October 14, 1987, the petitioner entered into an agreement with Nand Lal Aggarwal, respondent for sale of the said plot for Rs. 4 lacs and amount of Rs. 40 was paid as earnest money. The said agreement which was reduced into writing had been finalised through M/s. Subhash Mangat Company, Property Dealers, Chandigarh. As per the terms of the agreement, the petitioner was to obtain permission of the Estate Officer, HUDA, Panchkula, for sale of the plot. The Estate Officer asked for an affidavit of minor Radhika regarding transfer of the plot in the name of the petitioner and the said affidavit was sent to the Estate Office, but it was not accepted on the ground that affidavit of a minor was not valid. The petitioner was further told that permission for sale of the plot could not be granted as the interest of the minor could not be transferred without the permission of the civil Court. It is further alleged that before the above objections could be removed, minor Radhika, who is now 17 years of age, under the influence of relatives of her mother, told the petitioner that she would not sell the plot. She also sent a notice dated January 25, 1988, through her Advocate to the respondent to the effect that she was legal heir of her mother, Kamla Khanna, deceased and that she would not be bound by any sale effected by her father i. e. the petitioner. In view of these developments the petitioner returned the amount of Rs. 40,000/- by cheque No. 626122, dated March 26, 1988, drawn on State Bank of India, Jawaher Nagar Branch, Srinagar. The said cheque, which was in the name of Shri Nand Lal Aggarwal, respondent was sent by registered post on March 26, 1988, along with letter, Annexure P. 3 to M/s. Subhash Mangat and Co., Property Dealers, Chandigarh. The petitioner did not receive any reply and then sent another letter dated April 15, 1988, Annexure P. 4 to the Property Dealer with a copy to the respondent asking them to confirm the receipt of the cheque. However, he did not receive any reply and the respondent on May 16, 1988, filed a complaint under section 420, IPC against the petitioner. This complaint was dismissed in default on August 20, 1988, and then another complaint dated February 23, 1989, Annexure P. 5 was filed.

(3.) IT is pleaded that the petitioner had made genuine efforts to obtain permission of the Estate Officer to transfer the plot and on account of the complications referred to above, the permission was not granted and he immediately returned the amount by cheque. The conditions Nos. 3, 7 and 10 of the agreement Annexure P. 1 attached to the petition read as under :-