ARCHANA GUPTA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has filed the instant criminal misc. petition under Sec. 528 of BNSS for challenging the FIR No. 590/2018, registered at Police Station Shipra Path, Jaipur City (South) for committing offences under Ss. 420, 406 and 120-B of IPC.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that complainant-respondent No.2 lodged an FIR against the petitioner as well as two other persons Charan Singh and Rajesh Kumar Koolwal alleging therein that the accused have been indulged in property dealing business. In January, 2014, they represented before the petitioner with respect to one land Kanota, Tehsil Bassi, District Jaipur and after showing the land along with part construction raised thereon, other two co- accused got one agreement to sale executed between petitioner and complainant for selling land bearing Khasra No.174 measuring 6 Bighas and 1 Biswa for which the complainant made payment of Rs.51,00,000.00 (Rs.Fifty one lacs) to the petitioner and it was a condition of the agreement that soon after opening of mutation of the aforesaid land in favour of the petitioner, sale deed shall be executed after receiving the remain sale consideration. Complainant further alleged in the FIR that for a long time, the sale deed was not executed, than on enquiry, complainant could learn that the aforesaid land is not in Khatedari of petitioner and in fact litigation is going on in respect of aforesaid land. Still, under the circumstances where title of the petitioner was not clear, she had entered into agreement to sale with the complainant and thus, her intention to cheat the complainant was existing right from the beginning and thereby, she has maliciously grabbed Rs.51.00 lacs from the complainant, which is a punishable offence.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that bare perusal of the contents of FIR would reveal that the dispute has arisen on account of non-performance on the part of the petitioner in respect of terms and conditions of agreement to sale dtd. 29/1/2014, therefore, the dispute is of civil nature involving no criminal element. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner has no intention to cheat the complainant and merely on account of the fact that her extended family has initiated litigation with regard to Khatedari and mutation entries which is pending before the Board of Revenue, sale deed could not be executed. Hence, there is no mens-rea involved in the matter.