AVTAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, by way of filing instant petition under Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C. is seeking quashing of order dtd. 18/1/2023 (Annexure P-7) passed by the learned trial Court in case bearing FIR No.01 dtd. 8/3/2013 (Annexure P1) registered at Police Station NRI, Kapurthala, for offences punishable under Sec. 406, 420 and 120-B of IPC, whereby the learned trial Court has rejected the cancellation report submitted by the Investigating Agency and has also dismissed the application of the petitioner seeking discharge and consequently opted to frame charges against the petitioner on the same date i.e. 18/1/2023; with a further prayer of quashing the said charge sheet.

(2.) Learned senior counsel for the petitioner contends that Harneet Singh- the complainant in the present case, had entered into an agreement to sell dtd. 7/11/2008 for purchasing a chunk of land measuring 07 acres from the petitioner for a total sale consideration of Rs.4.00 crores. He further submits that an amount of Rs.2.00 crores was paid in cash and balance amount of Rs.2.00 crores was paid by way of issuing 08 cheques. The last date for execution and registration of the sale deed was 31/12/2009. However, it is stated that the father of the petitioner executed three sale deeds on 24/4/2009 in favour of four persons qua the land measuring 02 acres and 19 marlas (Annexure P-4). Thereafter, an FIR was registered on the complaint moved by the complainant on 8/3/2013 i.e. after the delay of 4 years and 4 months. Thereafter, the petitioner being an NRI moved a petition bearing No.CRM-M-35393 of 2013 seeking quashing of FIR, however, the same was dismissed vide order dtd. 14/2/2017 while observing that the petitioner had been declared as proclaimed offender, thus the FIR in question cannot be quashed at his behest. Thereafter, on an application dtd. 11/4/2017 moved by the petitioner before the IGP, NRI and Women Wing, an SIT was constituted and the matter was referred to the said SIT. The SIT had observed in its report dtd. 21/4/2017 that 08 cheques, issued for making payment of Rs.2.00 crores, were dishonoured on account of "insufficient funds."

(3.) Moreover, another fact was that the purchasers of 2 acres and 19 marlas of land i.e. Inderpal Singh, Tirlok Singh, Pawan Kumar and Sant Devi had stated that sale deeds were executed by co-accused Sohan Singh in their name for which consideration was already paid to the complainant earlier, in addition to the cheques, which were subsequently dishonoured. Thereafter, on 30/1/2020, a cancellation report was prepared and presented before the Court, whereupon a private complaint was also filed by the complainant. During this period, a petition bearing No.CRM-M-25481 of 2017 was moved before this Court, wherein the statement of AIGP Surinder Lamba, who was then present in the Court, was recorded. In his statement, he had stated that inquiry report dtd. 9/5/2018 had been submitted to IGP, NRI and Women Wing, Mohali and as per the said report, a complaint was moved by the complainant by concealing material facts from the earlier investigation and petitioner Avtar Singh son of Sohan Singh, Rashpal son of Chandan Singh (witness) and Girdhari Lal son of Pritam Singh (power of attorney holder of the petitioner) were not joined in the investigation. Besides, the persons, in whose names the sale deeds were executed, were also not joined in investigation. Therefore, as per the inquiry report, the allegations levelled in the complaint against the petitioner- Avtar Singh and his father Sohan Singh were not proved as the matter was of civil in nature. It was also observed that the FIR has been registered after inordinate delay of 04 years and 04 months.