Criminal Misc. No.M-23710 of 2008 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No.M-23710 of 2008 Date of decision : 3.12.2008 Mukhtiar Singh .....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. D. ANAND Present: Mr. Narinder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Manjari Nehru,Deputy Advocate General, Punjab Mr. K.K.Bansal, Advocate for respondent no.2. S. D. ANAND, J. The petitioner/accused and respondent no.2-complainant are real brothers inter-se and are co-sharers in the impugned Khasra. The petitioner/accused sold away land in excess of his share in the joint Khata (to a 3rd party). All brothers have left a 12' wide passage to the land belonging to the other co-sharers. The corresponding share part of the land is to be deducted from holding of all co-sharers including the petitioner/accused who did not leave any passage in the sold out land. It is apparent otherwise that a civil suit between the petitioner and the respondent no.2/complainant is already pending in the civil Court since the month of April, 2007. A conjunctive perusal of the material available before this Court would indicate that the controversy between the parties is pending in the Civil court. That suit had been filed by respondent no.2/complainant against the petitioner/accused. It is that Court which would take care of the Criminal Misc. No.M-23710 of 2008 -2- **** respective pleas of the parties about the validity/otherwise of the act of the petitioner/accused in having effected the impugned sale in favour of a 3rd party. Learned counsel for respondent no.2 argues that the petitioner/accused had, from the very beginning, dishonest intention to draw an unfair advantage by selling land in excess of his share and to deprive respondent no.2/complainant thereby of latter's share in that property. The plea advocated thereby is totally denuded of merit. The present is a pure and simple case of civil nature which is engaging the consideration of the competent Civil Court. The mere factum of the impugned sale does not, ipso facto, give rise to an inference that petitioner had dishonest intention from the very beginning. The continuation of the proceedings on the criminal side would, obviously, be an abuse of the process of the Court. In the light of the fore-going discussion, the petition shall stand allowed. The FIR No. 127 dated 12.6.2008 under Section 420 IPC, Police Station City, Mansa, District Mansa, and also subsequent proceedings arising out of that FIR, shall stand quashed. December 03, 2008 (S. D. ANAND) Pka JUDGE