Delhi District Court
Cr No. 45/14 "Dhawan Creative vs . Ashok Kumer & Ors." on 26 April, 2014
CR No. 45/14 "Dhawan Creative Vs. Ashok Kumer & Ors."
IN THE COURT OF SH. GAUTAM MANAN, ASJ-04
SOUTH WEST, DWARKA ,NEW DELHI
Criminal Revision No.45/14
In the matter of:
M/s Dhawan Creative Prints Pvt. Ltd.
Through its Managing Director
Mr. Gurucharan Singh Dhawan
B-9, 3rd Floor, Shanker Garden
Vikas Puri, New Delhi -110018 ... Complainant
Versus
1. Ashok Kumar Batra
S/o Late Sh. Sant Ram Batra,
2. Manish Batra
S/o Sh. Ashok Kumar Batra
3. Mr. Vishal Batra
S/o Sh. Ashok Kumar Batra
All resident of
A-1, Sainik Nagar
Uttam Nagar, New Delhi ... Respondents/ Accused persons
Date of institution of Revision : 05.04.2014
Date on which judgment reserved : 26.04.2014
Date on which judgment pronounced : 26.04.2014
ORDER
1. The present revision petition is filed by the revisionist against the order dated 01.03.2014, passed by Ld Metropolitan Magistrate, Dwarka Courts, Delhi, in case titled as "Dhwan Creative Prints Pvt Ltd Vs Ashok Batra & Ors" wherein the Ld Court dismissed the application of the revisionist seeking registration of the FIR.
Criminal Revision Page 1 of 5 CR No. 45/14 "Dhawan Creative Vs. Ashok Kumer & Ors."
2. Brief facts of the case as alleged by the revisionist/ complainant in its complaint are the revisionist company has been duped to the tune of more than Rs. 3 crore by accused persons in pre-planned conspiracy. Revisionist has submitted that accused no. 1 in the first week of August 2012 approached managing director of complainant through estate agent Sh. Shiv Kumar Batra and Avinash and they represented that accused no. 1 & 2 along with the other son of accused Vishal Batra as lawful owner and in possession of plot 13 & 14, Village Maksoodabad main Najafgarh measuring 2016 sq. yards and they are having perfect sellable title in the said property and for their bonafide needs willing to sell the same. Revisionist further alleged that accused no. 1 & 2 represented themselves authorized by accused no. 3 to enter in transaction with respect to sell of property in question and represented that there is no defect in title of property in any nature. The deal was finalized for a consideration amount of Rs. 7 crores.
3. It has been submitted that on 07.08.2012 Rs.70 lakhs were paid to accused persons when agreement to sell was entered. On 11.11.2012, accused no. 1 & 2 again approached revisionist in first week of November, 2012 for extension of time for compliance of agreement. On 03.11.2012 a sum of Rs. 2,30,000,00/- were paid to accused no. 1 & 2 in presence of witness but later on they came to know on 30.01.2013 that accused persons came with new story that they are not able to comply transaction as property has been mortgaged with Punjab National Bank, Criminal Revision Page 2 of 5 CR No. 45/14 "Dhawan Creative Vs. Ashok Kumer & Ors."
Amritsar and title deeds are also deposited / mortgaged with the bank and requested for cancellation of agreement dated 07.07.2012.
4. Revisionist has alleged that no amount was refunded by accused persons as per bayana receipt. Accused no. 1 and 2 has handed over 8 post dated cheques signed by accused no. 2 for Rs. 50 lakhs in favour of Dhawan Creative Prints Ltd. but all these cheques got bounced. It is stated that all the accused persons hatched a criminal conspiracy , committed criminal breach of trust and by deceiving the revisionist induced the revisionist to pay such a huge amount to the accused persons. Hence, all the accused persons have committed offences punishable under section 406/420/34 & 120-B IPC. It has been submitted that despite the revisionist has approached the police but nothing was done. On these allegations the revisionist prayed registration of FIR in the present case.
5. Vide impugned order the Ld Trial Court dismissed application of the revisionist and has refused the order registration of FIR by holding that the amount was paid by the revisionist in presence of witness, therefore, revisionist can bring evidence by summoning witnesses and there is no need for investigation for collection of evidence and moreover, the revisionist is in possession of all documents.
Criminal Revision Page 3 of 5 CR No. 45/14 "Dhawan Creative Vs. Ashok Kumer & Ors."
6. Aggrieved from the impugned order, revisionist has filed the present revision petition on the ground that the Ld Trial Court did not appreciate the fact that the accused are enjoying the crime proceeds and the alleged documents of mortgage of property are not in control or possession of the revisionist. The police being an investigating authority can recover the those documents and hence facts of the case demand registration of the FIR.
7. I have heard Ld. counsel for the revisionist and have also gone through the impugned order.
8. The revisionist company has alleged that it has already paid Rs 3 Crore to the accused persons to purchase the property which was already mortgaged with the Punjab National Bank, Amritsar thus by no means the revisionist is expected to procure those documents for proving its case. Those documents being important part of evidence are also required to be seized. Moreover, money trail is also to be found of the money which has been taken by accused persons from the revisionist company.
9. I have also perused the status report filed by the investigating agency before the Ld Trial court. In the report it has been stated that the accused did not cooperate with the inquiries put to them and they had also not disclosed that with which Branch of PNB, the property is mortgaged nor the accused have returned the money of the revisionist company. Criminal Revision Page 4 of 5 CR No. 45/14 "Dhawan Creative Vs. Ashok Kumer & Ors."
10. After going through the allegations made in the complaint, it is evident that accused despite having knowledge that the property stands already mortgaged to PNB, Amritsar not only entered into an agreement but they have taken Rs 3 crores from the revisionist. The facts in hand discloses commission of an cognizable offence which require an investigation by the police and hence Ld. Trial Court committed a material irregularity in not ordering the registration of FIR. Hence, I allow the revision petition of the revisionist and set aside the impugned order dated 01.03.2014. The SHO, concerned is directed to register a FIR under relevant provisions of IPC and proceed to investigate the matter in accordance with law. It is ordered accordingly.
Trial Court Record be sent back along with the copy of this order. File be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open court on 26th April 2014.
(Gautam Manan) ASJ-04/Dwarka Courts New Delhi Criminal Revision Page 5 of 5 CR No. 45/14 "Dhawan Creative Vs. Ashok Kumer & Ors."
26.04.2014 Present: AR with Sh. S.K Sharma, Counsel for revisionist TCR has been received.
Arguments heard.
Vide separate order of even date, the revision petition stands allowed. The SHO, concerned is directed to register a FIR under relevant provisions of IPC and proceed to investigate the matter in accordance with law. Ld. Trial Court shall proceed in the matter in accordance with the law.
TCR be sent back along with a copy of the order.
File be consigned to record room.
(Gautam Manan) ASJ-04/Dwarka Courts 26.04.2014 Criminal Revision Page 6 of 5