Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

1. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking quashing of FIR No.10, dated 12.1.2018, registered at Police Station Fattu Dhinga, District Kapurthala, under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC.

2. The FIR was registered at the instance of Inderjit Singh son of Paramjit Singh, wherein it has been alleged that his great grand-father Sadhu Singh owned land in Village Mand Surkhpur and Village Peerewal who had died leaving behind his widow Jai Kaur, son Davinder Singh and three daughters 1 of 14 (2) CRM-M-48718-2018 (O&M) Gian Kaur, Lubhai and Surinder Kaur. Davinder Singh was grand father of the complainant and had expired in the year 1987 leaving behind his wife Kulwinderjit Kaur and sons Paramjit Singh, Surjit Singh and Amarjit. It is alleged that although Gian Kaur had expired on 20.11.1983 and Lubhai had also expired about 9 years back but Surinder Kaur, another sister of Gian Kaur and Lubhai in connivance with Kulwinderjit Kaur fabricated three sale deeds dated 8.5.2015 pertaining to land measuring 15 kanals situated in village Mand Surkhpur and 10 kanals 19 marlas situated in Village Peerewal and got them executed through Gurmej Kaur w/o Jagdev Singh and Gian Kaur w/o Tara Singh who impersonated as Gian Kaur and Lubhai, daughters of Sadhu Singh although the said Gian Kaur and Lubhai daughters of Sadhu Singh had already expired. It is thus alleged that Kulwinderjit Kaur, Surinder Kaur, Gurmej Kaur, Gian Kaur w/o Tara Singh, Gurmail Singh, Lambardar Avtar Singh and Satish Kumar Deed Writer had all connived and conspired together for the purpose of getting the sale-deeds dated 8.5.2015 executed by way of impersonation so as to cause wrongful loss to complainant whose father Paramjit Singh had expired in 2006 and to cause wrongful gain to themselves. It is further alleged that the complainant had recently come to know that Kulwinderjit Kaur was further wanting to alienate the property in question on the basis of the aforesaid forged sale deeds.

7. I have considered rival submissions addressed before this Court. As far as the contention of the petitioner that the petitioner is not named in the FIR, a perusal of the FIR would indeed show that the allegations have mainly been levelled against the two impersonators namely Gurmail Kaur and Gian Kaur w/o Tara Singh who had impersonated in place of Gian Kaur and Lubhai daughters of Sadhu Singh when in fact Gian Kaur had already expired in the year 1983 and Lubhai had expired in the year 2009 approximately i.e. much prior to execution of the sale deeds on 8.5.2015. Apart from the said impersonators, the other accused are the beneficiary Kulwinderjit Kaur in whose favour the sale deeds were executed and the attesting witnesses Gurmail Singh, Lambardar Avtar Singh and Deed Writer Satish Kumar. However, a perusal of the reply filed by the State in the shape of affidavit of Sh. Karamvir Singh, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance Bureau Unit, Kapurthala shows that during investigation, the involvement of petitioner has also been found. In the reply it has specifically been stated to the following effect:

"............. The said complaint was allocated No.1415 and was enquired into by DSP, Sub Division, Sultanpur Lodhi, who submitted his enquiry report to effect that accused Gian Kaur wife of Tara Singh and accused Gurmej Kaur wife of Jagdev Singh impersonated themselves as actual owners i.e. Gian 5 of 14 (6) CRM-M-48718-2018 (O&M) Kaur daughter of Sandhu Singh and Lubhai daughter of Sandhu Singh and in connivance with the petitioner and other accused had executed the aforesaid three sale deeds in favour of Kulwinderjit Kaur, who further sold the property in question to accused Daljit Kaur and Surjit Kaur. It was further held in the enquiry that at the time of execution of the aforesaid sale deeds, accused Gian Kaur wife of Tara Singh and Gurmej Kaur wife of Jagdev Singh had attached the copies of their own Adhar Cards as proof of their identity. It was also submitted in the enquiry report that petitioner Dalbir Bhardwaj connived with the other accused and intentionally did not check the documents pertaining to the identity of the executants of the aforesaid sale deeds to facilitate the execution of the fraudulent sale deeds mentioned above in favour of Kulwinderjit Kaur..................................
9. In the present case during inquiry it has been found that impersonators Gurmail Kaur and Gian Kaur had in fact attached their own Aadhar Cards when they appeared before Sub Registrar. In other words, it is not the case that the imposters had produced forged documents as regards their identity to deceive the Sub Registrar and when prima facie during inquiry it has been found that the imposters were carrying their own documents of identity then it certainly remains unexplained as to why the act of impersonation could not be detected by the Sub Registrar.