Hardev vs State Of Haryana And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 14386 P&H

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                   CHANDIGARH

207-A
                                            CRM-M-40550-2022
                                            Date of decision : 15.11.2022

Hardev                                                         Petitioner

                                V/S

State of Haryana and another                                Respondents


CORAM :      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR VERMA

Present:     Mr. Anshul Sharma, Advocate
             for the petitioner.

             Mr. Munish Sharma, Asstt. A.G., Haryana
             for the respondent-State.

             Mr. J.S. Hooda, Advocate
             for respondent No.2.

                                ****

ASHOK KUMAR VERMA, J. (ORAL)

The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section

482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of FIR

No.282 dated 30.06.2022 registered under Sections 120-B, 406 and 420

of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Chand Hut, District

Palwal (Annexure P-1) and all consequently proceedings arising

therefrom.

The above-said FIR was registered on the complainant

made by respondent No.2-Rohtash Kumar alleging that the petitioner

had agreed to sell his land measuring 19 kanals 15 marlas situated in

Village Katesra, Tehsil and District Palwal to him for consideration of

Rs.1,30,84,375/-. On 22.07.2021 the petitioner executed an agreement

to sell in his favour and he had paid amount of Rs.15,50,000/- to the

petitioner as earnest money. The date for execution of the sale deed was

1 of 4

fixed as 28.10.2021. The petitioner had also taken loan from Haryana

Gramin Bank by mortgaging the land in question. A civil suit is also

pending in the Court regarding the land in question and it was clearly

mentioned in the agreement that the sale deed will be executed after

decision of the civil suit and if the civil suit was not decided till the

date fixed for execution of the sale deed, the date of execution of the

sale deed would be deemed to have been extended. However, on

23.12.2021, he came to know that the petitioner had sold the land in

question to some other person vide sale deed No.8948 dated

12.11.2021.

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner

has been falsely implicated in the present case. The dispute between the

parties is of civil nature which has been given a criminal colour. There

is no civil suit pending regarding the land in question as the same was

already disposed of by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-

Presiding Officer, National Lok Adalat, Palwal vide order dated

11.09.2021. The Manager, Sarva Haryana Gramin Bank vide letter

dated 21.10.2021 made it clear that the land in question was cleared

from loan. The petitioner has already cleared the loan on 12.07.2016.

On 28.10.2021, the petitioner reached at the Registration Office for

registering the land in the name of complainant, however, the

complainant did not come there. The petitioner tried his level best to

contact respondent No.2. When the complainant did not reply to the

petitioner even after making repeated request with regard to registration

of sale deed, the petitioner sold his land to co-accused Dharamvir vide

2 of 4

sale deed dated 12.11.2021. To harass the petitioner, the complainant

has filed a suit for a decree for specific performance of the agreement to

sell dated 22.07.2021 and the petitioner has also filed a suit for

declaration and permanent injunction which are pending in the Civil

Court. The complainant after a delay of more than 07 months filed a

complaint against the petitioner and other co-accused. The allegation

levelled by respondent No.2 against the petitioner is totally false and

baseless and are outcome of mala-fide intention to put undue pressure

and to blackmail the petitioner for extracting money from him.

Therefore, the instant FIR is liable to be quashed.

On the other hand learned State counsel assisted by learned

counsel for the complainant has opposed the present petition and

submits that the petitioner has cheated the complainant and dishonestly

induced him to deliver a sum of Rs.15,50,000/- on the mis-

representation that he would sell his land to him for consideration of

Rs.1,30,84,375/- and after sometime the petitioner sold the land in

question to some other person. The investigation is still going on in the

present case. Therefore, the present petition may be dismissed.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

record.

Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judgment passed in Niharika

Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra and others : 2021

SCC (Online) SC 315 observed that when the investigation by the

police is in progress, the Court should not go into the merits of the

allegations in the FIR. Police must be permitted to complete the

investigation. It would be premature to pronounce the conclusion based

3 of 4

on hazy facts that the complaint/FIR does not deserve to be investigated

or that it amounts to abuse of process of law.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case

particularly the fact that the investigation is still going on, the present

petition being premature is hereby dismissed.

15.11.2022                                (ASHOK KUMAR VERMA)
kothiyal                                         JUDGE

             Whether speaking/reasoned:              Yes/No
             Whether Reportable:                     Yes/No




                                 4 of 4