LAWS(P&H)-2015-8-609

TILAK RAJ Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER

Decided On August 18, 2015
TILAK RAJ Appellant
V/S
State of Punjab and Another Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition preferred under Section 482 Cr.P.C., a prayer has been sought by the accused/petitioner Tilak Raj for quashment of order framing charges dated 14.08.2012 (Annexure P13) passed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Phagwara as well as the chargesheet (Annexure P14) along with the order passed by the revisional Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kapurthala dated 14.08.2013 (Annexure P19) thereby dismissing the revision against this order.

(2.) The brief background that needs to be highlighted is that the petitioner happens to be in occupation of two rooms of the first floor of the property in question whereas respondent No.2 Inderjit was in occupation of the ground-floor as a tenant and which premises was owned by one and the same person. The owner, as the averments goes, had alienated the property and which respondent No.2 claims was under his ownership and with a view to get the upper floor in possession of the petitioner vacated, had offered a sum of Rs. 18.00 lacs, which was accepted by the petitioner and an agreement dated 10.09.2009 was executed between them by way of Annexure P1. As per the terms of the agreement, out of the total consideration amount of Rs. 18.00 lacs, a sum of '8.00 lacs was paid in advance and the balance amount of Rs. 10.00 lacs was to be paid on or before 31.12.2009 and it was thereupon the petitioner would hand over vacant possession of the premises under his occupation to respondent No.2. It is during the course of events, differences developed between the petitioner and respondent No.2, as a consequence of which claims and counter-claims were raised and thus, the dispute led to an imbroglio. The petitioner filed civil suit/plaint (Annexure P3) against the threatening acts of respondent No.2 in taking illegal and forcible possession of his premises. The stand of this agreement between the two was duly accepted in the written reply by respondent No.2 by way of Annexure P4. The trial Court passed orders dated 10.02.2010 (Annexure P6) in favour of the petitioner and which, as has been brought to the notice of this Court, has since then never been agitated before the higher courts. It is worthwhile to refer here that during the course of Civil Court proceedings, on the application of respondent No.2 (Annexure P7) payment of '8.00 lacs so received by the petitioner was repaid by way of Annexure P8, regarding which an order dated 08.03.2010 (Annexure P9) was passed based on the statements (Annexures P10 and P11). It is in between these events, a complaint was preferred by respondent No.2 leading to registration of the FIR in question (Annexure P12) against the petitioner for which the petitioner has come up before this Court.

(3.) Heard Mr. Prateek Pandit, Advocate representing the petitioner; Mr. R.S. Randhawa, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab on behalf of the State/respondent No.1 and Mr. Jasneet Mehta, Advocate appearing on behalf of Mr. L.M. Gulati, Advocate for the complainant/respondent No.2 and perused records of the case.