Delhi High Court
Kishan Lal vs State Of Gnctd on 22 November, 2019
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 22.11.2019
+ BAIL APPLN. 2631/2019
Kishan Lal ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. D K Sharma and Vinay
Tomar, Advocates
versus
THE STATE OF DELHI ..... Respondent
Through: Mr G.M.Farooqui,
APP for State alongwith
Insp. Ravi Kant, PS
Mahendra Park.
Mr. Chetan Bundela &
Amar Phogat, Advs. for
complainant.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRIJESH SETHI
JUDGMENT
BRIJESH SETHI, J (ORAL)
1. Vide this order, I shall dispose of an anticipatory bail
application filed on behalf of the petitioner kishan Lal under section
438 Cr.P.C. r/w. section 482 CrPC in FIR No. 0357/19 u/s.
406/420/120-B IPC.
2. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has prayed for anticipatory bail
Bail Appl. no. 2631/2019 Page no.1
on the ground that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely
implicated in the present FIR. The petitioner is aged about 50 years
and is doing the business of sale/purchase of various fruits at New
Subzi Mandi, Azadpur, Delhi for the last more than 30 years and
main accused Leela Kishan is also engaged in same business and he
was one of the partner of the petitioner since last 18 years and
running their partnership business from Shop no. B-972, New Subzi
Mandi, Azadpur, Delhi (in short 'shop in question') being the joint
owners of the shop in equal share of 50% each. Due to financial
hardship co-accused Leela Kishan entered into an agreement to
sell/purchase with Virender Tuteja in the month of March, 2019 in
respect of 50% share of his shop no. B-972, New Subzi Mandi,
Delhi and received a sum of Rs.30,00,000/- in cash from Virender
Tuteja. Since the petitioner was also having share to the extent of
50% in the said shop, therefore, buyer Virender Tuteja also got
signature of the applicant just for the sake of satisfaction that he has
entered into a genuine deal but petitioner has not received a single
amount from Virender Tuteja. Later on petitioner came to know that
some dispute between main accused Leela Kishan and Virender
Bail Appl. no. 2631/2019 Page no.2
Tuteja has arisen as regard the sale/ purchase of the shop and said
Virender Tuteja has got registered the present FIR against Leela
Kishan where he has also named the petitioner. It is submitted that
petitioner Kishan Lal had already sold his 50% share to one Deepak
Nanda on 02.05.2019 and this fact was well within the knowledge of
Virender Tuteja as well as Chowki Incharge and SHO of PS
Mahendra Park. After registration of the FIR, co-accused Leela
Kishan has executed the ownership documents of the abovesaid
50% share of the 'shop in question' on 02.09.2019 in favour of
complainant Virender Tuteja and Vinod Kumar.
3. It is further submitted that co-accused Leela Kishan had taken
Rs.2,02,00,000/- from the petitioner Kishan Lal by way of fruits/
goods and in cash, though he had issued a cheque of Rs.90,00,000/-
in discharge of part liability of the above said amount, the same was
got dishonoured and the petitioner Kishan Lal has already filed two
cases i.e. complaint u/s. 200 r/w. Section 156 (3) CrPC and
complaint case u/s. 138 of NI Act which is pending in the Rohini
Courts, Delhi.
4. It is submitted that petitioner had moved an application u/s.
Bail Appl. no. 2631/2019 Page no.3
438 CrPC before Ld. Sessions Judge and the said application was
dismissed on 17.09.2019 by the court of Sh. Jitendra Mishra, Ld.
ASJ, Rohini Courts, Delhi.
5. It is submitted that dispute between the parties is civil in
nature. The petitioner is ready to join the investigation as and when
required and in these circumstances, it is prayed that petitioner be
released on anticipatory bail/ interim protection to join the
investigation and SHO/IO be directed to release the petitioner in the
event of his arrest.
6. The anticipatory bail application is opposed by the Ld. APP
for the State on the ground that the allegations against the petitioner
are serious in nature. Petitioner is not joining the investigation.
There are clear allegations of cheating against him. The
investigation is still in progress and at initial stage. The petitioner is
not cooperating with the investigating officer. He has, therefore
prayed for dismissal of the bail application.
7. I have considered the rival submissions. Perusal of the FIR
reveals that the same was registered by complainant Sh. Virender
Tuteja. He has stated that in March, 2019 petitioner Deepak Nanda
Bail Appl. no. 2631/2019 Page no.4
@ Vicky Nanda has approached him with malafide intention to
purchase the shop in question by stating that the shop will be
available at a price less than the market price and possession will be
immediately handed over to him. He had also arranged a meeting
with Kishan Lal and Leela Kishan and told that they are owners of
the shop. Both of them had assured that the shop is free from all
type of encumbrances like mortgage etc. Deal of the said shop was
finalized for a consideration of Rs. Two Crore & Ten Lacs only and
Rs. Thirty Lacs were paid as earnest money on 13.03.2019 to the
petitioner and his co-accuseds and further payments were also made
in five instalments in between 19.03.2019 and 28.03.2019 and in
this way a total amount of Rs. 90,00,000/- was paid by the
complainant. The time fixed for the execution of the sale deed was
for a maximum period of 03 months and the complainant was to pay
the rest of the consideration amount on or before 03 months. The
complainant had also purchased the requisite stamp papers to the
tune of Rs.2,40,000/-. However, sale-deed was not executed in
favour the complainant.
8. As per the complaint, petitioner Kishan Lal @ Kali, Lila
Bail Appl. no. 2631/2019 Page no.5
Krishan and Deepak @ Vickey Nanda kept on avoiding the
complainant and did not execute the sale-deed of the property in
question in favour of the complainant. When he visited the said shop
and came to know that the petitioner Deepak Nanda @ Vicky Nanda
is in actual physical possession of the said shop and claimed himself
to be the owner of the same. In the agreement to sell and purchase/
bayana it has been specified by petitioner Kishan Lal @ Kali and
Lila Krishan that the property in question is in their possession and
same is free from all kinds of encumbrances. Part payment of the
tune of Rs. 90,00,000/- was made by the complainant. Co-accused
Deepak Nanda @ Vickey Nanda, who was instrumental in
convincing the complainant to purchase the property, is himself in
possession of the 'shop in question' which prima facie shows
criminal conspiracy between petitioner Kishan Lal @ Kali and co-
accuseds Deepak Nanda & Lila Kishan in order to cheat the
complainant. Petitioner and co-accused Lila Krishan have failed to
transfer the 'shop in question' in favour of the complainant despite
the fact that the complainant was ready and willing to perform his
part of the agreement. Thus, prima facie all the three accused
Bail Appl. no. 2631/2019 Page no.6
persons in a well pre planned criminal conspiracy has cheated the
complainant for an amount of Rs. 90,00,000/-. Case is at the initial
stage of investigation. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner is
required to recover the cheated amount. In these circumstances, no
gro`unds for anticipatory bail are made out. The anticipatory bail
application is, therefore, dismissed.
BRIJESH SETHI, J
NOVEMBER 22, 2019
Amit
Bail Appl. no. 2631/2019 Page no.7
