JASWANT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Criminal Miscellaneous Nos. 1256 and 5416 of 2012 are being disposed of by way of this common order since both the petitions have arisen out of FIR No. 237 dated 13.12.2011, registered at Police Station, Sadar, Jalandhar, District Jalandhar. In both the petitions identical prayer for quashing of the said FIR has been made by all the three petitioners.

(2.) Brief facts of the case, as culled out from the material available on record, are that respondent No. 2 Mukhtiar Singh son of Mehar Singh, resident of Samrari, Tehsil Phillaur, District Jalandhar, presented an application before the police to the effect that on 02.06.2010, the petitioners, namely, Jaswant Singh and Jagdish Kaur had executed an agreement to sell their land measuring 2 kanals 8 marlas, situated in village Jandiala, Tehsil Phillaur, District Jalandhar, at the rate of Rs. 75,00,000/- per acre to respondent No.2/complainant. Petitioner Jaswant Singh had received one cheque of Rs. 2,00,000/- and Harmangal Singh had received two cheques worth Rs. 6,00,000/-on behalf of his wife-Jagdish Kaur from respondent No.2/complainant as earnest money. As per agreement to sell (Annexure P-1), the sale deed was to be executed by 31.07.2010. With the consent of the petitioners, the date for execution of the sale-deed was extended till 10.08.2010. On the so appointed/extended date, the respondent No.2-complainant kept on waiting for the petitioners throughout the day in the office of Joint Sub-Registrar, Nurmehal, for getting the sale deed executed but the petitioners did not turn up and as such respondent No.2-complainant got his presence marked before the Joint Sub-Registrar, Nurmehal, to establish his availability. Later, the petitioners-accused exchanged a portion of the land in dispute with some other persons and also executed an agreement to sell in favour of those persons. It was further alleged that the petitioners backed out from performing their part of the agreement to sell (Annexure P-1), rather exchanged the portion of the said land which was agreed to be sold to respondent No.2- complainant with some other persons. They also executed fresh agreement to sell the land in dispute in favour of other persons, therefore, the petitioners committed cheating with respondent No.2-complainant and also misappropriated the amount paid to them by respondent No.2-complainant.

(3.) On the basis of the afore-said averments, an inquiry was conducted by the police and after obtaining the opinion from the District Attorney (Legal), the impugned FIR was registered.