CRIMINAL MISC. M NO.28963 OF 2008 :{ 1 }: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION: NOVEMBER 12, 2008 Dalip Kumar and another .....Petitioners VERSUS State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? PRESENT: Mr. Jasjit Singh Bedi, Advocate, for the petitioners. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. This case has a checkered history. Fortunately or unfortunately, the matter concerning this case has come up before this Court on more than one occasions in some form or the other. The petitioners now pray for quashing of FIR dated 3.1.2003 registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 209, 120-B IPC, and the subsequent proceedings including the challan presented under Section 173 Cr.P.C. It is averred in the petition that this case is registered on account of inimical relations between Vijay B. Verma, Advocate, co- accused of the petitioners on account of professional revelry and the petitioners have been roped in, being associate of the said Advocate, Vijay B. Verma and one being his Clerk. It is alleged that this is a case of malicious prosecution filed with a view to settle personal CRIMINAL MISC. M NO.28963 OF 2008 :{ 2 }: scores with the petitioners. A perusal of the FIR would show that an application was moved before Senior Superintendent of Police, Ludhiana, for conducting enquiry into the Government Improvement Trust Land grabbing scandal. A land measuring 700 Sq.Yards situated in Model Town Extension, Part II, Block C, Ludhiana, owned by Improvement Trust, Ludhiana, is alleged to have been grabbed by Vijay B. Verma, Advocate, his son, Sachin Verma and his wife, Sita Verma. As per the allegations, officials of the Improvement Trust, Ludhiana, had connived with these persons and have allowed them to even construct Hotel named Marriot illegally on the Trust land. Prayer is accordingly made for taking action against these guilty persons. The petitioners, however, would contend that this land was owned by Ludhiana Central Bank Cooperative House Building Society Limited, Ludhiana, which now formed part of Model Town Extension Part II in Block C, Ludhiana. This land was acquired by the Improvement Trust but subsequently exempted and continued to be in the ownership and possession of the Society. It is stated that this piece of land measuring 700 Sq.Yards was sold by the said Society to Model Town Extension Club, Ludhiana, on 29.1.1992. The case, as set up by the petitioners, further is that the Society remained owner in possession of the land as compensation was not paid and scheme was abandoned and, thus, this land was transferred in favour of Model Town Extension Club (Regd.). When Ludhiana Improvement Trust threatened to demolish this construction raised on the plot, Vijay B. Verma filed a suit for permanent injunction on 11.3.1991. It is further stated that this suit was decreed on 28.9.1995 CRIMINAL MISC. M NO.28963 OF 2008 :{ 3 }: in favour of the Club and Ludhiana Improvement Trust was restrained from dispossessing the Club and demolishing the construction over the plot. It is seen that Trust had subsequently initiated proceedings for eviction of Club from the piece of land. These proceedings were challenged by way of another civil suit. This suit, however, was dismissed on 28.2.1999. Appeal against this judgment was subsequently allowed on 2.12.1999, holding that this Club was not a public premises. This judgment was challenged vide R.S.A No.1266 of 2005, which was admitted by Division Bench of this Court on 8.8.2006. While admitting this R.S.A, Division Bench of this Court had noticed the facts in detail, which would make an interesting but disturbing reading. While hearing Civil Writ Petition No.4873 of 2003 filed in Public Interest certain startling facts had come to the notice of a Court, which revealed connivance of staff of Improvement Trust, Ludhiana, in helping the so called Model Town Extension Club to grab the Trust property. It is then that pendency of the R.S.A No.1266 of 2005 came to the notice of the Court. The Division Bench was constrained to notice that the writ petition was pending adjudication since March 2003 and apparently strained efforts were made by the official respondents to say that it was not maintainable. The allegations in the writ petition were that a Hotel Marriot has been illegally constructed on the land measuring 700 Sq.Yards belonging to the Government/Trust stated to be worth crores of rupees. Allegation was that the officials of the Trust never took any action against the private respondents, who had constructed this hotel. Though there were pleadings that writ petition be dismissed as the CRIMINAL MISC. M NO.28963 OF 2008 :{ 4 }: challenged raised therein was to the decree passed by the civil Court but they remained evasive about the action on their part to challenge this decree passed by Civil Court. It was a case where the Government land has been usurped by the respondents therein who had constructed a hotel. This stand was being taken by the Trust despite the fact that it was disclosed that the Trust was owner of the land over which this hotel has been constructed. When the dereliction on the part of the Improvement Trust officials indicating their connivance to help the private respondents started receiving the attention of the Court, an affidavit was filed by Diyal Chand Garg, Executive Officer, Ludhiana improvement Trust, Ludhiana, disclosing the follow up action taken by the Trust against its employees for not properly acting in this case. From this affidavit dated 19.5.2006, it was revealed that the land measuring 15125 Sq. yards was acquired by the Trust in 1970. 54% of the land belonging to the Society was exempted by the Trust on 21.8.1990. 46% of the land so exempted, thus, remained in the ownership of the Trust. Advocate Vijay B. Verma, who was impleaded as respondent in the writ petition, being honorary Secretary of the Club of which his wife claimed herself to be the President applied to the Trust for allotment of land measuring 700 Sq.Yards. Trust surprisingly consented to use of this land by the Society as a caretaker. There was a rider that no one will be allowed to encroach the same. This proved to be the first step in efforts of these persons to grab this valuable land. All these facts came to the notice of this Court and are recorded in the order dated 8.8.2006, copy of which is annexed with the petition as Annexure P-8. It is also noticed that Trust learnt that certain persons tried to illegally sell the CRIMINAL MISC. M NO.28963 OF 2008 :{ 5 }: plots from the aforesaid land and accordingly it issued notice prohibiting the same. At that stage, the Trust had also withdrawn the consent given to the Club as a Caretaker. The possession was sought back but never complied with. Thus, the land belonging to the Trust and given as a Caretaker remained in the illegal possession of the so called Club. It is on this land that this hotel has been constructed. The sale deed relied upon and referred to by the petitioners dated 29.1.1992 was described as a sham, void, false, forged and fabricated document. The Division Bench of this Court observed that this was definitely so as the sale deed was executed by Vijay B. Verma in favour of other private respondents, who are his wife etc. It is then that the matter had gone to Civil Court and these judgments referred to above were passed. It was noticed that the officials of the Trust to favour these persons did not challenge the judgment and ultimately filed a Regular Second Appeal half heartedly in the year 2006, when it was delayed by 782 days. Application for condoning the delay was also filed, disclosing that some of the officials of the Trust had connived with Vijay B. Verma by not intentionally filing this appeal. Even file had been misplaced. The counsel appearing before this Court had withdrawn the application seeking condonation of delay for filing application with better particulars. Thereafter, no such application was filed. In this background, the record of the R.S.A No.1266 of 2005 was called for hearing alongwith this Writ Petition. The Division Bench accordingly observed that it was not bound by any technicalities to interfere in this matter. Observing that it can not be a silent spectator to the fraud played by these private persons in CRIMINAL MISC. M NO.28963 OF 2008 :{ 6 }: connivance with the officials of the Trust, the R.S.A was admitted to be heard with Civil Writ Petition No.4873 of 2003 by condoning the delay of 782 days. This order passed by the Division Bench statedly was impugned by Vijay B. Verma by filing Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that delay in filing the Regular Second Appeal was condoned without affording any opportunity of hearing to the appellants therein, which was considered not warranted. This appeal was accordingly allowed and the impugned order was set-aside. The order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court further reveals that second appeal is restored to its original number and this Court has been directed to consider the Regular Second Appeal and pass appropriate orders. From the order it appears that Hon'ble Supreme Court was under the impression that the R.S.A had been allowed. In fact, the R.S.A was admitted after condoning the delay and is still pending adjudication before this Court. Thus, the issue of grabbing of this land in the manner as afore-mentioned is still pending and the petitioners can not take any advantage of the decrees passed in the civil suit. The prayer of the petitioners that registration of a criminal case and the consequential proceedings are without jurisdiction or sheer abuse of process of law certainly can not be accepted. The facts in this case, as projected in the petition, are totally misleading and amount to mis-statement by the petitioners. Had this Court not been aware of the true state of affairs having dealt with the R.S.A and the writ petition, the petitioners may have been able to pass these half baked facts to get CRIMINAL MISC. M NO.28963 OF 2008 :{ 7 }: relief. A situation seems to be alarming, specially so when the Improvement Trust officials are conniving with the petitioners ever since this land has been usurped and hotel constructed thereon. The plea that this controversy in the FIR is conclusively adjudicated by the Civil Court is apparently misconceived and amounts to misleading statement. The allegations made in the FIR are very serious and reveal commission of offences as alleged. A plot which was taken for the purpose of maintenance has been sold. To say that no offence is made out in these circumstances is totally misconceived and misplaced argument and deserves to be rejected. The submission by counsel for the petitioners that petitioner No.1 is only a witness to the sale deed, which is executed by the Society in favour of the Model Town Extension Club and that there is no allegation against petitioner No.2 again can not be accepted. Nothing need to be said in the manner in which this sale has been made. Petitioner No.1, being a witness, can not be said to be unaware of the fraud that has been perpetrated on the Trust to usurp this land. The reference by the petitioners that the cancellation report in this case has been accepted by the Ilaqa Magistrate would also not come to his rescue as this order was set-aside and directions were issued for conducting further investigation. In fact, the issue concerning this Hotel came to the notice of this Court in Civil Revision No.1070 of 2007. This Court felt perturbed over the aspect that no one was properly investigating the issue in this case. The relevant observations in this regard are as under:- “It would further be disturbing to notice that no one, till CRIMINAL MISC. M NO.28963 OF 2008 :{ 8 }: date, has thought of initiating or taking action in this matter to investigate this scam and then to take appropriate action against all those who are responsible including the petitioner. This piece of public land on which hotel has been constructed and is being run could have invoked the interest of public at large. It would also be in the interest of public to know as to how public property can be usurped without being checked by the authorities that be. Such an action on the part of the petitioners would not have been possible but for connivance on the part of the employees of the Improvement Trust, Ludhiana. Still, no one has taken any action to make any one accountable or to recover this public property worth a fortune and to restore it for use by the public.” The Court considered it appropriate to direct investigation by Vigilance Department of the State so that persons and people involved in making the petitioners to grab this property are brought before justice. Vigilance Chief was directed to register an FIR, if not already registered in this case and to ensure proper and well meaning investigation against all those persons including the employees of the Improvement Trust, Ludhiana and to make them to account for their deliberate connivance with the petitioners. So alarmed was the Court that the said Civil Revision Petition was adjourned to ensure further direction and compliance of this order. This being the gravity of the situation, certainly the Court would not exercise its power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash this FIR. Rather, it is viewed by this Court that this FIR needs to be CRIMINAL MISC. M NO.28963 OF 2008 :{ 9 }: investigated well and properly. The investigation has not made further progress, as the order passed in civil revision has been stayed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Obviously, the conniving Improvement Trust may not be interested in placing the correct and true facts before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The judgment relied upon by counsel for the petitioners that decision of the Civil Court is binding on the Criminal Court would not come to his rescue as the Civil Court judgment apparently has been obtained by misleading and fraud and matter is still pending adjudication before this Court in the form of Regular Second Appeal. Accordingly, I need not refer all these precedents cited by the counsel in this regard. The matter is at investigation stage. Some how or the other main accused has been able to stall investigation and is earning by constructing a hotel on Trust land. Matter must be allowed to be investigated, which is not to be interfered by Courts in exercise of inherent jurisdiction. Time and again, Hon'ble Supreme Court has emphasized that Courts are not to interfere in the police power to investigate a criminal offence. See State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Awadh Kishore Gupta and others, 2004 (1) RCR (Criminal) 233. The Courts, thus, must stay its hands off for exercising inherent jurisdiction in this case, which is nothing but a fraud of high degree committed by the person involved. The present petition deserves to be dismissed and it is so ordered. It is expected from the police and vigilance that they would investigate this matter thoroughly and bring it to logical conclusion, once the stay granted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court is vacated. It would be appropriate to see in this case that every officer concerned CRIMINAL MISC. M NO.28963 OF 2008 :{ 10 }: perform his duty as per law. Let copy of this order be placed before the Minister concerned for him to ensure proper action. Copy be also sent to Chief Secretary, Punjab, as apparently Advocate General does not seem to be concerned with the property of Improvement Trust, Ludhiana. November 12,2008 ( RANJIT SINGH ) khurmi JUDGE