IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Misc. No.33786 -M of 2008 DATE OF DECISION : MARCH 18, 2010 PRADIPT CHAUDHARY & ORS. ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA & ANR. .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Mr. Avnish Mittal, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Sr. DAG, Haryana. AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) This petition under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, has been filed for quashing of case FIR No.369 dated 24.8.2005 under Sections 7 and 10 of the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975, Police Station, Sadar Karnal (Annexure P-1). Considering the nature of the offences, District Town Planner has filed reply on behalf of respondent No.2, which is taken on record. From the reply, it is made out that petitioners No.2 to 5 sold their land through General Power of Attorney i.e.petitioner No.1, to 42 different persons in the shape of plots. The land, which is subject matter of the FIR, is covered under the definition of colony as per the provisions of Criminal Misc. No.33786 -M of 2008 2 Section 2(c) of the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975. Urban area has been defined as any area of land within the limits of municipal area or notified or situated within 5 KMs of limits thereof, or any other area where, in the opinion of the Government, there is potential for building activities and the Government by means of notification declares it to be an urban area. The site in question falls in municipal limits of Karnal town and, therefore, the provisions of the Act are applicable. Considering the reply, I am of the opinion that inherent powers under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, cannot be invoked to quash the FIR, while holding that even on reading of the FIR, commission of the offences is not made out. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed. Anything stated hereinabove shall not be construed as an opinion on the merits of the case. The petitioners would be at liberty to take all the pleas taken before this Court before the trial court, as permissible in law. March 18, 2010 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?