IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. 54123-M of 2005 Date of decision: 5th March, 2009 Narinderjit Singh … Petitioner Versus State of Punjab … Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. S.P. Soi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Mehardeep Singh, Assistant Advocate General Punjab for the State. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) By this common order, two petitions viz. Criminal Misc. No.54123-M of 2005 preferred by Narinderjit Singh and Criminal Misc. No. 19678-M of 2006 preferred by Paramjit Singh and others will be decided together. Both the above said petitions have been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the FIR No. 316 dated 31.07.2005 (Annexure P-1) registered at Police Station Nakodar, District Jalandhar under Section 36 of Punjab Apartment and Property Regulation Act, 1995. Counsel for the petitioners have raised a preliminary plea that no proceedings can be initiated against the petitioners as the land sold by the petitioners was outside the lal lakir but within the phirni of the village. Therefore, it has been stated that this land cannot be included in the Criminal Misc. No. 54123-M of 2005 definition of Colony as it has been specifically stated that a Colony shall not include any area of abadi deh of any village or inside lal lakir or phirni. Counsel for the petitioners, in support of this, have relied upon the report of Tehsildar and site plan (Ex.P-4). Additional affidavit was filed by Diljinder Singh PPS, DSP, Sub Division, Nakodar. He has stated that land in dispute is situated outside the lal lakir but inside phirni of the village. Report of Tehsildar and the site plan are not per-se admissible. They are to be proved by adducing evidence. Accordingly, trial Court is directed to decide this plea of the petitioners before framing charge against the petitioners. Since petitioners are the residents of the village and are sought to be prosecuted in the FIR, which is regarding the sale of land and under the genuine belief land has been sold by them, their personal appearance before the trial Court, shall remain exempted, subject to their filing an undertaking that they shall cause their appearance as and when required by the trial Court. They shall also file an undertaking that the evidence, if any, recorded in their absence but in the presence of their counsel, shall be binding upon them. The trial Court may incorporate any other conditions in the undertaking to be submitted by the accused. Copy of this order be given dasti on payment of usual charges. With these observations present two petitions are disposed off. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE March 5, 2009 rps 2