Punjab-Haryana High Court
Kulwinder Kaur vs State Of Punjab And Another on 7 October, 2013
Author: Inderjit Singh
Bench: Inderjit Singh
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
......
Criminal Misc. No.M-20967 of 2013
.....
Date of decision:7.10.2013
Kulwinder Kaur
...Petitioner
v.
State of Punjab and another
...Respondents
....
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh
.....
Present: Mr. H.B.S. Baidwan, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Harsimrat Rai, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab
for respondent No.1-State.
None for respondent No.2-complainant.
.....
Inderjit Singh, J.
This petition has been filed by Kulwinder Kaur-petitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.3 dated 4.1.2012 registered for the offences under Sections 420 and 120-B IPC at Police Station Derabassi, District S.A.S. Nagar (Mohali) and all subsequent and consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua the petitioner.
In the petition it is stated that the FIR is the misuse of the process of law. The petitioner has also been cheated by co-accused, namely, Baljinder Singh son of Bhupinder Singh along with his friend Gurdeep Singh etc. on the pretext of marrying her to co-accused, namely, Baljinder Singh. It is stated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated Parmar Harpal Singh 2013.10.09 10:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Cr. Misc. No.M-20967 of 2013 [2] in this case. Only allegation against the petitioner was that she was in the contact of the co-accused and purchased the land at the time of agreement and being a purchaser of any land from any body makes no offence. It is also stated that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are totally false.
The brief facts of the prosecution case as stated in the FIR are that Bhupinder Singh entered into an agreement to sell with the complainant regarding his land measuring 20 Bighas. He received earnest money to the extent of `31 Lacs but instead of executing the sale deed in the name of the complainant, Bhupinder Singh executed sale deed in favour of Kulwinder Kaur present petitioner. Later on the sale deed of the above land was got registered in the name of Bhupinder Singh's wife, namely, Kulbir Kaur and after that in the name of Rajinder Singh son of Banarsi Dass. It is also mentioned in the FIR that Bhupinder Singh committed this entire cheating and forgery in connivance with Halqa Patwari Jai Singh, Kulbir Kaur wife of Bhupinder Singh and Rajinder Singh son of Banarsi Dass.
At the time of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that there is no evidence on the record to show that any offence has been committed by the present petitioner. The main allegations are against Bhupinder Singh co-accused. The present petitioner is not beneficiary in the present case. She is not relative of Bhupinder Singh or other co-accused. There are no allegations regarding any conspiracy or connivance against her. Therefore, he argued that there being no Parmar Harpal Singh 2013.10.09 10:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Cr. Misc. No.M-20967 of 2013 [3] allegations against the petitioner, the FIR qua her should be quashed.
On the other hand learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab appearing for the respondent-State contested this petition.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record minutely and carefully.
From the perusal of the FIR itself, I find that there are no allegations of cheating against the present petitioner. Rather, the FIR has been registered on the written complaint and the complainant has asked to take action only against Bhupinder Singh, Kulbir Kaur, Rajinder Singh and Jai Singh Halqa Patwari. It is no where stated that action be also taken against the present petitioner Kulwinder Kaur. A perusal of the FIR itself shows that except the averments that Bhupinder Singh before the date of execution of sale deed in favour of the complainant got executed sale deed in favour of Kulwinder Kaur and thereafter in the name of his wife Kulbir Kaur and afterwards in the name of Rajinder Singh, there is nothing against the petitioner. So, a perusal of the FIR shows that the present petitioner is also not beneficiary. Further, I find that it is also stated in the FIR that Bhupinder Singh committed this entire cheating and forgery in connivance with Halqa Patwari Jai Singh, Kulbir Kaur and Rajinder Singh. In the FIR even the complainant is not alleging any conspiracy or connivance of Kulwinder Kaur with the other co-accused. The petitioner is not related to Bhupinder Singh, Kulbir Kaur or Rajinder Singh i.e. the other co-accused. Therefore, from the perusal of the record, it is clear that it is a case of no evidence against the present petitioner. It Parmar Harpal Singh 2013.10.09 10:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Cr. Misc. No.M-20967 of 2013 [4] is settled law that when no offence is made out from the case of the prosecution, then the proceedings should be quashed. It is only abuse of process of law.
Finding merit in the present petition, the same is allowed and FIR No.3 dated 4.1.2012 registered for the offences under Sections 420 and 120-B IPC at Police Station Derabassi, District S.A.S. Nagar (Mohali) and all subsequent and consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua petitioner Kulwinder Kaur are hereby quashed.
October 7, 2013. (Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp* Parmar Harpal Singh 2013.10.09 10:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh