Allahabad High Court
Pradeep Kumar Agrawal And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 29 August, 2022
Author: Suneet Kumar
Bench: Suneet Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ? Court No. - 48 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10544 of 2022 Petitioner :- Pradeep Kumar Agrawal And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Amit Daga,Rohit Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Umang Srivastava Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
Hon'ble Syed Waiz Mian,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioners today is taken on record.
Sri Pankaj Kumar Govil has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent no. 4.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the informant and learned AGA for the State.
This petition has been filed with the prayer to quash the impugned first information report dated 26.6.2022 which was registered as Case Crime No. 185 of 2022 for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 506 IPC, Police Station - Hathras Gate, District - Hathras.
The matter was earlier taken up on 11.8.2022, this Court passed the following order:-
"Heard Shri Amit Daga, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Umang Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that so far as the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is concerned, the same is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding offences under Section 320 of the IPC. The said power is to be exercised viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. He submits that criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil favour stand on different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. In such category of cases, the High Court is competent to quash the criminal proceedings with further rider that the offences, where the compromise between the offender and victim have already taken place and the possibility of conviction is very remote and bleak and continuation of criminal case would put accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim. Therefore, he submits that in case no indulgence is accorded in the present matter, the petitioner would suffer irreparable injury which cannot be compensated by any other means.
Shri Amit Daga, learned counsel for the petitioners fairly contended that due to oversight and inadvertence, name Mauja got wrongly typed as 'Mauja-Satoha Asgrapur' in place of 'Mauja-Nagla Sadola' in the agreement to sell dated 31.08.2016 and the said discrepancy was not in the knowledge of either of the parties. The Company of the petitioners were always willing to discharge its liability pursuant to agreement to sell but unfortunately the informant being Director of M/s Santana Design Private Ltd. had not shown his desire to perform his part pursuant to said agreement. The said typographical error even has not been brought into notice to either of the parties when the efforts were made for extension of period. He submits that the informant was fully aware with the said mistake and taking advantage of the same and on ill-advise in order to extort some amount from the Company and its Director, the present criminal proceedings have been initiated. He fairly states that the said discrepancy can very well be rectified and the needful would also be done, in case indulgence is accorded by this Court.
Learned counsel for the informant fairly states that he has no objection in case the said discrepancy is rectified.
Put up this matter again as fresh on 29th August, 2022.
Till the next date of listing, respondents are restrained to arrest the petitioners pursuant to Case Crime No. 185 of 2022, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 I.P.C., police station Hathras Gate, District Hathras, subject to cooperation in the on-going investigation."
It is not being disputed by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are Directors of S.J.P. Global Company Limited, duly registered under the Companies Act. It is further admitted that a registered agreement to sell dated 31.8.2016 was executed in favour of M/s Santana Design Private Limited. The respondent no. 4 is one of the Directors of the Company. It appears that the sale deed was not executed within the stipulated time, accordingly, an extension registered agreement to sell in respect of the property was executed by S.J.P. Global Limited on 25.7.2017. The allegation in the first information report is that the petitioner included Plot No. 194 situated in village Satoha Asgarpur, District Mathura, which is recorded for Shamshan / Kabristan vesting in the State. The agreement to sell dated 31.8.2016 has been placed on record by the petitioners which admittedly includes the land vesting in the State earmarked for Shamshan / Kabristan. The subsequent agreement to sell dated 21.5.2017 has not been brought on record, the document has been supplied by learned counsel appearing for the informant which includes the same number. This material document has been suppressed by the petitioners. The learned counsel for the informant submits that petitioners pursuant to the agreement to sell have received money and have willfully and deliberately attempted to cheat the complainant by repeatedly including plot which vests with the State. The agreement to sell cannot be acted upon.
It is further informed that several other first information reports have been lodged against the petitioners with the same allegation with regard to other agreement to sell.
Learned counsel for the petitioners in this backdrop submits that the inclusion of Shamshan / Kabristan land was made inadvertently and an appropriate application has been moved before the Sub Registrar.
Having regard to the allegations made in the first information report and the materials placed on record, we are of the view that ingredients of the offence against the petitioners is made out, accordingly this petition is dismissed.
The petitioners are directed to take remedy before the competent court for anticipatory bail / bail in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 29.8.2022 Arif