Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jaspal Singh And Another vs State Of Punjab on 24 August, 2021
In The High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana
At Chandigarh
CRM-M-55455-2019 (O&M)
Date of Decision:- 24.8.2021
Jaspal Singh and another .... Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab ... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL
Present:- Mr. Mohit Jaggi, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Mr. Ajay Pal Singh Gill, DAG, Punjab,
assisted by ASI Baljinder Singh.
Ms. Sarika Gupta, Advocate, for the complainant.
(Proceedings conducted through video conferencing)
*****
GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. (Oral)
1. The petitioners have approached this Court seeking grant of
anticipatory bail in respect of a case registered against them vide FIR
No.118, dated 30.12.2017, Police Station Phase 8, SAS Nagar,
Mohali, under Sections 406, 420 and 120-B IPC.
2. The FIR was lodged on behalf of M/s R.K. Enterprises of which
Rajesh Gupta and Meera Gupta are the partners. It is alleged that on
1.7.2006 they had entered with an agreement with Jaspal Singh and
Avtar Singh who had applied for allotment of land to GMADA and
who had agreed to sell 2 SCOs measuring 200 Sq. Yards each, 2
1 of 4
-2- CRM-M-55455-2019 (O&M)
residential plots measuring 500 Sq. Yards each, 2 residential plots
measuring 300 Sq. Yards each and 2 residential plots measuring 200
Sq. Yards each, the price of which was fixed as Rs.7 crores. The
complainant alleged that out of the total sale consideration of
Rs.14.60 crores, an earnest amount of Rs.1.20 crores had been paid
but the accused did not do anything for transfer or for taking any
further step for transfer of the plot and later they came to know that in
fact the petitioners were having some family dispute and on account
of which 'Letter of Intent' was not issued by the GMADA.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that it was on
account of some technical issues that the needful was not done by
GMADA and on account of which the land could not be transferred
to the complainant and that in any case he has always been ready to
compensate the complainant in respect of the earnest amount
deposited by him and has already deposited an amount of Rs.2 crores
in this Court to show his bonafides.
4. Opposing the petition, learned State counsel assisted by learned
counsel for the complainant has submitted that in the instant case the
intention of the petitioners to cheat the complainant is clearly evident
and that he should not have entered into any agreement in case there
was any issue regarding title of the property or in case there is any
dispute amongst the co-sharers.
5. I have considered rival submissions addressed before this Court.
6. At the time of issuance of notice of motion on 23.12.2019, the
following order was passed:
2 of 4
-3- CRM-M-55455-2019 (O&M)
"Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
although he had received an amount of Rs.1.20 crores
in lieu of agreement entered into for sale of property
to the complainant which somehow could not be
transferred on account of the fact that some litigation
is pending. Learned counsel for the petitioners
however submits that his clients are willing to pay an
amount of Rs.2 crores in order to compensate the
complainant and that they shall deposit the same in
this Court within one month from today.
Notice of motion for 30.3.2020.
Meanwhile, in the event of arrest, the
petitioners be released on interim bail subject to their
furnishing personal bonds and surety bonds to the
satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer.
However, the petitioners shall join the investigation as
and when called upon to do so and cooperate with the
Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the
conditions as provided under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.
The aforesaid interim directions are subject to
the condition that the petitioners deposit an amount of
Rs.2 crores with Registrar General of this Court,
which shall be invested in FDR.
At this stage, Ms. Sarika Gupta, Advocate has
put in appearance on behalf of the complainant and
has filed power of attorney, which is taken on record."
7. The petitioners/accused are not disputing having received the amount
of Rs.1.2 crores from the complainant pursuant to an agreement for
sale of property. It however, transpires that on account of certain
issues the 'Letter of Intent' was not issued by GMADA on account of
3 of 4
-4- CRM-M-55455-2019 (O&M)
which the property could be transferred to the complainat. Since
pursuant to interim directions issued on 23.12.2019 the petitioners
have already deposited an amount of Rs.2 crores in this Court which
stands invested in FDRs, it cannot be said that the intention of the
petitioners right from very inception was to cheat the complainant. In
any case, the case in hand is mainly based on documentary evidence
and would not justify any custodial interrogation. The petition, as
such, is accepted and the interim directions issued by this Court vide
order dated 23.12.2019 are hereby made absolute subject to the
condition that the petitioners shall join investigation as and when
called upon to do so and cooperate with the Investigating Officer and
shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 438 (2)
Cr.P.C.
8. As regards the amount which stands deposited in this Court, it is
directed that upon the guilt of the petitioners being established and
upon such judgment attaining finality, the complainant would be
entitled to proceeds of the aforesaid FDRs which stand deposited in
this Court. However, in case the accused are found innocent and any
such judgment attains finality, the proceeds shall be handed over to
the petitioners.
24.8.2021 (GURVINDER SINGH GILL)
Mohan JUDGE
Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No
Whether Reportable Yes / No
4 of 4
