IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.877 of 2010 Date of Decision: March 18, 2010 Sucha Ram .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Haryana .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Vivek Goyal, Advocate, for the petitioner. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) This revision petition is directed against judgment dated 22.2.2010 passed by the lower Appellate Court (Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra) whereby the conviction and sentence of the petitioner has been confirmed. The petitioner was tried for commission of offence under Section 420 IPC. Learned counsel contends that complainant Surender Singh knew that the land that was sought to be sold to the complainant, was under a registered mortgage deed dated 19.6.2002. Crl. Revision No.877 of 2010 [2] Learned counsel however admits that in the agreement to sell, the said fact was not recited and therefore, it transpires that relevant fact was concealed from the complainant. The ingredients of Section 420 IPC read with Section 415 IPC, under the circumstances, are satisfied. No ground for interference in criminal revision jurisdiction is made out. The petition is dismissed. (AJAI LAMBA) March 18, 2010 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?