DALJIT SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will dispose of two petitions bearing Crl. Misc. Nos. M-34338 and M-34352 of 2012 one filed by Daljit Singh and another and another filed by Darshan Singh, seeking concession of pre-arrest bail. The FIR was registered at the instance of complainant Harjinder Singh alleging that the complainant after having sold his land in District Fatehgarh Sahib was looking for the land. Jagtar Singh introduced the complainant with Daljit Singh, petitioner and Gurdeep Singh for purchase of the land. The said persons had shown lands at different places. Daljit Singh invited the complainant to inspect the land. The complainant alongwith Jagtar Singh, Surinder Singh went to see the land when petitioner Darshan Singh, Daljit Singh and Satpal Singh showed the land to them and introduced the complainant to Jawala Singh, owner of the land. Jawala Singh told the complainant that he had sold his land to Satpal Singh and that they may execute the agreement of sale with Satpal Singh. He promised to get the sale deed registered in his name. Petitioners received a sum of Rs.5 lacs as token money. The sale consideration was settled at the rate of Rs.20.45 lacs per acre. The amount of Rs.2,37,73,000/- was settled as total consideration. An additional sum of Rs.25 lacs as earnest money was paid on May 20, 2011. The petitioners were asked to bring Satpal Singh for execution of the sale deed but the petitioners continued to delay the matter with false promise. On complaint having been submitted by the complainant, the matter was inquired into and it was found that the petitioners have persuaded the complainant to part with huge sum of money with a promise to get the land transferred in his name belonging to Jawala Singh through Satpal Singh.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioners has vehemently contended that the dispute, if any, is of civil nature. He has placed strong reliance on the judgment in Inder Mohan Goswami and another Vs. State of Uttranchal and others, 2007 (4) RCR (Criminal) 548 in support of his contention that there is a growing tendency of business circle to convert purely civil disputes into criminal cases as the civil remedies are time consuming. In the said judgment the Hon'ble Apex Court had quashed the FIR of cheating setting aside an order of High Court of Uttranchal.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and considered the ratio of the judgment cited by him. There is no dispute regarding the powers possessed by the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The said power being very wide is an extraordinary remedy for quashing of the proceedings whenever there is an abuse of the process of the Court. The guidelines and parameters for quashing of the proceedings in FIR have been enumerated in State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1994 SC 604.