KHETA RAM Vs. STATE OF HARAYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - In this petition under section 438 Cr. P. C. , the petitioner initially sought pre-arrest bail in the case FIR No. 11 dated 12. 1. 2007, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 IPC, registered at Police Station ellanabad, District Sirsa. However, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case which glaringly disclose the exercise of powers under Section 156 (3) Cr. P. C. in a mechanical manner, the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr. P. C. , has been suo motu invoked so as to quash the FIR as also the consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

(2.) THE facts may be briefly noticed.

(3.) A complaint dated 3. 1. 2007 was instituted under Section 156 (3) Cr. P. C. , inter alia, alleging that the petitioner had approached the complainant and his brothers to purchase the petitioner's agricultural land measuring 19 kanal 8 marlas situated within the revenue estate of Village kunthla; the complainant and his brothers agreed to purchase the said land @ Rs. 36,000 per acre, therefore, an 'agreement to sell' was executed between the parties on 10. 10. 1990; the petitioner, firstly, received rs. 22,000 as earnest money and thereafter balance sale consideration of Rs. 65,300 was also received by him on 12. 12. 1990; the sale-deed was to be executed on 17. 12. 1990; the petitioner, however, did not execute the sale-deed in favour of the complainant and his brothers and put off the matter on one pretext or the other; the petitioner, however, became greedy and has now sold the said land to Smt. Shanti Devi, w/o Inder Singh, and has executed a sale-deed in her favour and that since the subject land has been sold by the petitioner and purchased by Smt. Shanti Devi knowing fully well that the complainant and his brothers had already purchased the same, both of them were guilty of committing offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 506 IPC.