Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ankit Kumar vs State Of Haryana on 14 December, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:161518
2023:PHHC:161518
203 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-39105-2022
Date of decision: 14.12.2023
ANKIT KUMAR
...PETITIONER
V/S
STATE OF HARYANA
...RESPONDENT
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR
Present: Mr. Tribhawan Singla, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Geeta Sharma, DAG, Haryana.
****
HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (ORAL)
The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
for quashing of FIR No.330 dated 14.12.2016 (Annexure P-1) registered under
Section 7-A of Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act,
1975 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') at Police Station Ellenabad, District
Sirsa and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the
present FIR was lodged on the allegations that the petitioner has carved an
unauthorized colony on the land falling in Khewat No.129, 130, 151, 152,
Khasra Nos.106//23/1/2, 23/1/1/2 total land 3 kanals, 9 marlas, 7 Sarsahi in the
revenue estate of village Dhani Jattan, Tehsil Ellenabad, District Sirsa in
violation of Section 3 of 7(1) of the Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that
admittedly, the land was sold in the year 2011 and 2012 and reliance is placed
on the copy of jamabandi for the year 2012-13 in this regard.
4. That as per the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban
Areas Act, 1975, Section 2 (c) defines the colony which is reproduced below:
1 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:161518
2023:PHHC:161518
Section 2(c):
2. Definition,- In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires, -
(a) to (bb) xxxx xx xx
(c) "colony" means an area of land divided or proposed to be divided
into plots or flats for residential, commercial, industrial, cyber city or
cyber park purposes or for construction of flats in the form of group
housing or for the construction of integrated commercial complexes or
for division into plots for low-density eco- friendly colony, but an area
of land divided or proposed to be divided:
i. For the purpose of agriculture; or
ii. As a result of family partition, inheritance, succession or
partition of joint holding not with the motive or earning profit; or
iii. In furtherance of any scheme sanctioned under any other
law; or
iv. By the owner of a factory for setting up a housing colony
for the labourers or the employees working in the factory;
provided there is no profit motive; or
v. When it does not exceed one thousand square meters or
such less area as may be decided from time to time in an urban
area to be notified by Government for the purposes of this sub-
clause, shall not be a colony.
5. That further as per Section 3 of the aforesaid Act, there is
necessity to obtain a licence for developing a colony in any urban area and
Section 7 prohibits to advertise and transfer the plots without obtaining the
licence under Section 3 and further as per Section 7A, any document which is
required to be registered under Section 17 of the Registration Act purporting to
be transferred by way of sale/lease any agricultural land having an area less
2 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:161518
2023:PHHC:161518
than 2 Kanals in an urban area as may be notified specifically by the
government from time to time for the purpose of this Section then he has to
obtain a No Objection Certificate by the Director or any officer authorized on
his behalf and further Section 9 of the aforesaid Act had provided exemption
from obtaining licence in certain cases and Section 9(b)(i) provided that where
the land does not exceed 4000 sq. meters and is situated within the limits of
Municipal Area, there is exemption from taking the licence and Section 10 of
the aforesaid Act provided that if any person who contravene any provision of
this Act or rules made thereunder shall be punishable with an imprisonment for
a term which may extend upto 3 years and shall also liable of fine.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the FIR was
lodged on 14.12.2016 and the challan was presented on 23.03.2021, which is
beyond the period of 3 years provided under Section 468(2) of Cr.P.C. As
such, in view of the bar under Section 468(2) of Cr.P.C., after the lapse of a
period of 03 years from the date of occurrence, the Magistrate cannot take
cognizance of an offence. The reliance is placed upon Janak Raj vs. State of
Haryana, 2002(4) RCR Criminal 248, Mahipal versus State of Haryana,
2018 RCR (Criminal) 5, whereby, this Court had quashed the FIR under
Section 7 of the Act, on the ground that the cognizance was taken by the
concerned jurisdictional Magistrate, after the lapse of a period of 03 years
provided under Section 468(2) of Cr.P.C.
7. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer made by the
petitioner, on the ground that the probable defence of the petitioner cannot be
seen at this stage and the target date, in view of the judgment of the
constitutional Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Sara Mathew
vs. Institute of Cardio Vascular Diseases, 2014(2) SCC 62, would be the date
on which, the FIR was registered and not the date on which, the concerned
3 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:161518
2023:PHHC:161518
jurisdictional Magistrate takes the cognizance.
8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the
record with their able assistance, it transpires that the FIR was registered on
14.12.2016 and as such, any sale deed before 13.12.2013 is clearly beyond the
period of limitation of 03 years provided under Section 468(2) of Cr.P.C. The
sale deeds of the land in question were registered in the year 2011 and 2012.
Thus, the case of the petitioner would clearly breach the threshold of Section
468(2) of Cr.P.C.
9. In view of the judgment passed in Janak Raj (supra) and Mahipal
(supra), this Court finds that the registration of the FIR as well as subsequent
submission of final report under Section 173 of Cr.P.C., are much after the 03
years i.e. the period of limitation prescribed under Section 468(2) of Cr.P.C.
Therefore, the present petition is allowed. The FIR No.330 dated 14.12.2016
(Annexure P-1) registered under Section 7-A of Haryana Development and
Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975 and all other consequential proceedings
arising therefrom are hereby quashed qua the petitioner only.
(HARPREET SINGH BRAR)
December 14, 2023 JUDGE
manisha
(i) Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
(ii) Whether reportable Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:161518
4 of 4
