Crl. Misc. No.M-30055 of 2010 ::1:: IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 18.01.2011 (i) Crl. Misc. No.M-30055 of 2010 Rajesh Saini .. Petitioner Versus State of Haryana .. Respondent (ii) Crl. Misc. No.M-37596 of 2010 Sita Ram Singla .. Petitioner Versus State of Haryana .. Respondent Present:- Mr.K.D.S. Hooda, Advocate, with Mr.Narender Sura, Advocate, for the petitioner-Rajesh Saini. Mr.R.S. Rai, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Gautam Dutt, Advocate, for the petitioner-Sita Ram Singla. Mr.G.S. Sandhu, AA.G., Haryana. Mr.Jagdish Sharma, Advocate, for the complainant. * * * * S.S. SARON, J. This order will dispose of CRM No.M-30055 of 2010 filed by Rajesh Saini and CRM No.M-37596 of 2010 filed by Sita Ram Singla as they arise in respect of the same FIR. The respective petitioners, in the two petitions, pray for grant of pre-arrest bail in a case registered against them on 20.08.2010 at Police Station Civil Lines, Gurgaon, for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B Indian Penal Code. Crl. Misc. No.M-30055 of 2010 ::2:: The FIR, in the case, has been registered on the complaint of Dinesh Chandra Pant, resident of Sanjay Gram, Gurgaon. The case of the complainant is that he is owner of one plot No.B-45-A, situated in the Sanjay Gandhi Memorial Co-operative House Building Society Limited, Gurgaon ('Society'-for short). According to the complainant, his maternal uncle (Harish Chandra Mishra) and father (Dharmanand Panth) on 05.04.2009 purchased Plot No.B-45-A, measuring 133.3 Sq.Yds. for a sum of Rs.26 lacs from Shajju and Sita Ram Singla (petitioner in CRM No.M-37596 of 2010). Sita Ram Singla (petitioner) President of the Society, had prepared the papers. It is alleged that now Sita Ram Singla (petitioner in CRM No.M-37596 of 2010), Rajesh (Rajesh Saini-petitioner in CRM No.M-30055 of 2010), Jai Bhagwan, Anil and Kedar (non- petitioners) in collusion with each other were wanting to take possession of the plot; besides, misappropriated their amount of Rs.26 lacs. The complainants were residents of District Almora, Ranikhet. The father of the complainant had retired as Headmaster of a school and he had purchased the plot with the money which he got on his retirement; besides, had collected some amount from here and there. The father of the complainant along with his maternal uncle had purchased the plot. They did not have anybody at Gurgaon and they were alone there. It is alleged that the complainant and his family members apprehend danger from the above- mentioned persons and they can do anything at any time. They were getting repeated verbal threats from these persons and were being told to run away from there; otherwise the complainant and his family would be finished or may be involved in some fake case and sent to jail where they can rust. They may even be shot at. It was requested that the family of the complainant and his property be protected. If something untoward happens then the said persons would be responsible. The factual position that has been submitted is that Crl. Misc. No.M-30055 of 2010 ::3:: one Anil Kataria, resident of the area was owner of land measuring 1080 Sq.Yds. He entered into an agreement to sell (Annexure P-1 in CRM No.M-30055 of 2010) the plot measuring 1080 Sq.Yds. in favour of Rajesh Saini (petitioner in CRM No.M-30055 of 2010) for a consideration of Rs.1,80,90,000/-. An amount of Rs.18,09,000/- in cash was received as token/earnest money. The date fixed for execution of the sale deed was 05.05.2008. The seller-Anil Kataria had no objection if the vendee got the registry or general power of attorney executed in his name or in the name of his nominee. The seller received the total sale consideration on 02.11.2008 and issued a consolidated final receipt and possession certificate of the same date i.e. 02.11.2008. The land sold by Anil Kataria to the petitioner-Rajesh Saini was surrounded by land of Sanjay Gram Society owned by Sita Ram Singla (petitioner). When Rajesh Saini went to see the plot, Sita Ram Singla said that he would not give any passage to Rajesh Saini. Rajesh Saini then asked Anil Kataria to return his amount. The matter was then settled between Sita Ram Singla and Anil Kataria that out of 1080 Sq.Yds. of land eight plots will be carved out and Anil Kataria will sell seven plots out of eight to Sita Ram Singla. Sita Ram Singla was to prepare the documents of Sanjay Gram Society and Anil Kataria was to give general power of attorney to Sita Ram Singla. One plot was sold to one T.A. Shajju for a sale consideration of Rs.26 lacs. The said T.A. Shajju sold the said plot to Harish Chandra Mishra (maternal uncle) and to the father (Dharmanand Panth) of the complainant-Dinesh Chandra Panth for a sale consideration of Rs.26 lacs. After the sale in favour of the maternal uncle and father of the complainant, a dispute arose between the seller T.A. Shajju and Dharmanand Panth. T.A. Shajju, the seller, submitted an application to the police against Anil Kumar (Anil Kataria), Rajesh Saini (petitioner in CRM No.M-30055 of 2010), Kedar, Mani @ Mohit Sharma and also Sita Ram Singla (petitioner in CRM No.M-37596 of 2010). The Crl. Misc. No.M-30055 of 2010 ::4:: said application was enquired into by the police and Sub Inspector Jagdish Chand, who, gave his report on 16.03.2010 in which it was held that no case was made out. It is submitted that the land of Anil Kumar (Anil Kataria) falls between the land of the Society. It is submitted that the Society owns 7 acres of land and Anil Kumar (Anil Kataria) owned 1080 Sq.Yds. of land, which was surrounded by the land of Society. Therefore, on the request of the purchasers of the plot from Anil Kataria, the Society was providing the basic amenities i.e. road, water, sewerage and electricity. These facilities were provided after taking an amount of Rs.1,35,000/-. In view of the said arrangement, it was agreed that the plot in question i.e. Plot No.B-45-A had been sold to the Society after giving general power of attorney in favour of the Society. The Society issued share certificates and other documents after taking an amount of Rs.1,35,000/- for the said facilities to be provided to the purchasers. Apart from this, the Society had no concern with the sale consideration. Rajesh Saini had sold other plots directly to the parties after taking the entire sale consideration and issued share certificates after taking Rs.1,35,000/- from the purchasers. T.A. Shajju has stated that he made payment to Rajesh Saini. The purchasers-Harish Chandra Mishra and Dharmanand Panth had also made payment to T.A. Shajju. Harish Chandra Mishra has also filed a suit for permanent injunction against the Society and Jai Bhagwan (Proprietor of M/s JBS Associates). In the said suit, Harish Chandra Mishra (plaintiff) who is the maternal uncle of the complainant has submitted that he had paid full and final payment of Rs.26 lacs for the said plot to Mr.Shajju at the time of executing documents in his favour by the Society and that he is absolute owner-in-possession of the said plot. An order of status quo with respect to the said plot has been passed in favor of Harish Chandra Mishra in the suit filed on 15.12.2009. The grievance of the complainant, during the course of Crl. Misc. No.M-30055 of 2010 ::5:: hearing is that Anil Kataria who has executed the general power of attorney dated 08.10.2008 in favour of the Society through Sita Ram Singla has denied his signatures on the same and it is submitted that the said general power of attorney is witnessed by Rajesh Saini (petitioner). Therefore, it is submitted that the petitioners are interfering in possession of the plot. The signatures of Anil Kataria, Sita Ram Singla and Rajesh Saini have been taken by the police for the purposes of getting them compared. It is, however, not disputed that on the strength of the said general power of attorney dated 08.10.2008, the attorney Sita Ram Singla has not sold the plot in question in favour of Harish Chandra Mishra or Dharmanand Panth. The said plot, as per the stand of Harish Chandra Mishra in his plaint dated 15.12.2009 is that he purchased the plot from one Shajju by paying Rs.26 lacs. Besides, during the course of hearing, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners have submitted that they have nothing to do with the plot and they have no intention to encroach upon the same. Besides, it is submitted that ASI Jagdish Chand, who had earlier found no merit in the complaint in his report dated 16.03.2010 is now again investigating the same matter; besides, it may be noticed that the signatures of the petitioners have been taken and have been sent for comparison. It is yet to be ascertained whether the general power of attorney dated 08.10.20008 is genuine or fake. For the said purpose, the custody of the petitioners is not required. In the facts and circumstances, the interim bail granted to Rajesh Saini on 11.10.2010 and that granted to Sita Ram Singla on 23.12.2010 are made absolute. Both the criminal miscellaneous petitions stand disposed of. (S.S. SARON) January 18, 2011 JUDGE sukhpreet