RAKESH KUMAR Vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant. Perused the impugned FIR and the case diary.

(2.) The accused petitioner Rakesh Kumar S/o Nanak Chand has approached this court by way of the instant criminal miscellaneous petition filed under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of the FIR No. 169/2016 registered at the Police Station Padampur, District Sri Ganganagar. The said FIR was lodged at the instance of the respondent No.2, complainant Sukhjinder Singh, on 02.08.2016 alleging inter alia that he was desirous of starting a business at Sri Ganganagar and thus, was on look out for a shop. He met a property dealer named Krishna Kumar, who showed him various properties. The complainant came across the shop No.76 located in the Purani Dhan Mandi, Sri Ganganagar ad measuring 11.9' x 10.9', which was owned by the petitioner Rakesh Kumar. The complainant was told that Rakesh Kumar was desirous of selling the shop. The complainant talked to Rakesh Kumar and he expressed that he was desirous of buying his shop. Talks between the complainant and the petitioner continued. Ultimately, the accused came down to the house of the complainant at Padampur for negotiations and the accused offered to sell his shop to the complainant for a consideration of Rs.35 lacs. The complainant agreed to the said proposal and an agreement in writing was executed between the complainant and the petitioner on 15.12.2014 at the house of the complainant in the presence of the dealer Krishna Kumar and one Prashant Sharma. A sum of Rs.25 lacs was paid as advance by the complainant to the accused petitioner and the remainder of Rs.l0 lacs was agreed to be paid on 15.06.2016, on which date, the registered sale deed was to be executed. The complainant called the accused a few days before 15.06.2016 and apprised him that the registry of the shop had to be executed on that day. The accused advised him to reach the Sub Registrar's office on 15.06.2016 with the remaining amount so that the procedure for registry could be carried out. The complainant reached the office of the Sub Registrar on 15.06.2016 as scheduled, but the petitioner did not reach there. The complainant tried to contact the petitioner, but he avoided all his attempts. Finally the complainant could somehow trace out the petitioner on 16.06.2016, but he bluntly refused to honour the agreement and told that he was not desirous of executing the registered sale deed.

(3.) On the basis of this report, FIR No. 169/2016 came to be registered against the petitioner for the offences under Sections 406 and 420 IPC and investigation commenced.