Delhi High Court
Attar Singh vs The State (Nct Of Delhi) on 7 March, 2012
Author: M. L. Mehta
* THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN. 153/2012
Date of Decision: 07.03.2012
SHYAM SUNDER SHARMA .... PETITIONER
Through: Mr.Madan Bhatia, Sr. Advocate with
Mr.Anup Kumar Sinha, Advocate.
Versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ......RESPONDENT
Through: Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP.
WITH
BAIL APPLN. 161/2012
ATTAR SINGH .... PETITIONER
Through: Mr.L.S.Saini, Advocate.
Versus
THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ......RESPONDENT
Through: Ms. Fizani Husain, APP.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA
M.L. MEHTA, J.
1. These petitions under Section 439 CrPC are filed for seeking bail in
case FIR No. 28/2010, under Sections 13(1)(d) of P.C.Act read with
Sections 420/468/471/120-B IPC, P.S. Anti Corruption Branch.
2. The petitioners are arrayed as accused in the aforesaid FIR along with
the other persons. During investigation of FIR No. 23/2010, under P.C.Act
and Section 420/120-B IPC of Anti Corruption Branch, it was revealed that
large scale illegal conversion of agriculture land was going on in the area of
Sub-Division of Saraswati Vihar. It was revealed that illegal colonizing was
being done by the accused persons in connivance with some government
officials by converting vacant agricultural lands into plots and selling them
to people by representing them that the plots of unauthorized colonies are in
the process of regularization. It was noticed that this was going on in a large
scale and the documents i.e. General Power of Attorney, Agreement to Sell,
Will etc. pertaining to sale were being executed by evading the stamp duty.
There are specific allegations against the petitioner Shyam Sunder that he
had sold agricultural lands in the shape of small plots to different persons by
giving them different plots numbers forming part of Village Sawda abadi
known as Upkar Vihar. It was alleged that he being an agriculturist and a
colonizer, was aware of the fact that the land which he had sold in the shape
of small plots was agricultural land and was not forming part of Upkar Vihar
and in any case, not a part of the list of colonies under regularization. The
constructions had been carried out in the land and the plots which were sold
and which were ultimately got demolished SDM. Innocent purchasers are
alleged to have been cheated and duped of their huge amounts.
3. With regard to the petitioner Attar Singh also, the allegations are that
he had sold agricultural land in the shape of various plots of small sizes by
executing the documents of Power of Attorney, Agreement to Sell etc. and
mentioning therein those plots to be situated in the area of Village Sawda
Colony, known as Upkar Vihar Extension. It is also alleged against him that
he also being a farmer and colonizer knew that the agricultural land could
not be fragmented and sold in the shape of small plots and that the said
agricultural land did not form part of the residential colony known as Upkar
Vihar Extension and further, that this colony did not figure in the list of
colonies to be regularized as per the scheme of the Government.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner Shyam Sunder submitted that no
case under Prevention of Corruption Act was made out against this petitioner
and in any case, the offence, if any, was under Section 420 IPC and Section
81, Land Reforms Act. It was submitted that there was no complaint against
the petitioner Shyam Sunder from any of the vendees nor any one of them
has filed any suit against him to set aside the sale transactions. It was also
submitted that the petitioner was an aged person.
5. With regard to the petitioner Attar Singh, it was submitted by his
counsel that he had sold some land to Sunil Kumar Jain without mentioning
the same to be part of any colony and that in any case, he has already
compromised with Sunil Kumar Jain in the civil suit that was filed against
him and that, Mr. Jain has further refunded the amounts which he had taken
from different purchasers.
6. Per contra, it was submitted by learned APP that both the petitioners
have undertaken the activities of illegal colonizing of agricultural lands and
have misrepresented to the innocent persons that those lands formed part of
Village Sawda abadi known as Upkar Vihar and Upkar Vihar Extension
which did not figure in the list of unauthorized colonies to be regularized by
the Government as per the scheme of regularization. It was submitted that
the statements of various investors/purchasers have been recorded and they
have confirmed that the petitioners have misrepresented and cheated them.
As per the documents which have been collected during investigation and
placed on record, it is seen that both the petitioners have consciously
executed these documents such as General Power of Attorney, Agreement to
Sell, Will etc. and have specifically mentioned the number of the plots.
Undisputedly, the lands of which these small plots have been carved out, are
agricultural and did not form part of colony Upkar Vihar or Upkar Vihar
Extension and were not amongst the colonies which are in the process of
regularization. Since both the petitioners have sold large number of such
plots by colonizing on different dates, the possibility cannot be ruled out of
their continuing in colonizing, if they are released on bail. Notice can also
be taken of the fact that illegal colonizing of agricultural lands has become a
menace for the city and it is still continuing despite the fact that the cut-off
date has already been announced by the Government for regularization of
such colonies.
7. Having regard to the above facts and circumstances, I am not inclined
to admit the petitioners on bail at this stage. Hence their applications are
dismissed.
8. Nothing contained in this order shall amount to expression of opinion
on the merits of the case.
M.L. MEHTA, J.
MARCH 07, 2012
akb
