Crl. Misc. No. M-32796 of 2009 -1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No. M-32796 of 2009 Date of Decision: 24.8.2011. Jaspreet Kaur and another ........Petitioners Vs. State of Punjab and another ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. Munish Singla, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. G.S.Brar, Asstt. A.G. Punjab for respondent No.1. Mr. S.S.Salar, Advocate for respondent No.2. ..... SABINA, J. Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of the FIR No. 57 dated 03.06.2009 (Annexure P-4), under Sections 406, 420 of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC' for short), registered at Police Station Bhadson, District Patiala. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the dispute between the parties was purely civil in nature and hence, FIR in question was liable to be quashed. Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on 'Dalip Kaur and others versus Jagnar Singh and another, 2009(4) R.C.R. (Criminal), 540', wherein it was held that if the dispute between the parties was essentially a civil dispute resulting from a breach Crl. Misc. No. M-32796 of 2009 -2 - of contract on the part of the appellants by non-refunding the amount of advance the same would not constitute an offence of cheating. Learned state counsel and the counsel for respondent No.2, on the other hand, have submitted that that the petitioners had committed offence of cheating as they had failed to execute the sale deed despite receipt of earnest money. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that the instant petition deserves to be allowed. In the present case, respondent No.2 lodged the FIR in question on the allegations that the petitioners had agreed to sell the land in question to him vide agreement to sell dated 09.11.2006 (Annexure P-1). At the time of execution of the agreement to sell, ` 50,000/- were paid towards earnest money by him. The sale deed was to be executed on 30.5.2007 but the date for execution of the sale deed was extended to 16.8.2007. However, the petitioners had failed to execute the sale deed and had sold the land in question to somebody else. Annexure P-1 is the agreement to sell in question. As per the same, the petitioners had agreed to sell the land in question to respondent No.2 and had received ` 50,000/- towards earnest money. Annexure P-2 is the affidavit, sworn by Gurdeep Kaur to the effect that she had remained present in the office of the Sub Registrar, Fatehgarh Sahib on 16.8.2007 but the purchaser had failed to appear. The case of the respondent No.2, on the other hand, is that he was always ready and willing to perform his part of the contract. Since the present case relates to violation of agreement to sell, the dispute between the Crl. Misc. No. M-32796 of 2009 -3 - parties is purely civil in nature. The offence of cheating or misappropriation cannot be said to be made out in the facts and circumstances of the present case. For an offence of cheating, dishonest intention of the accused must arise at the very inception of the transaction. The said ingredients are missing in the present case. A perusal of the FIR does not lead to the inference that the petitioners had any dishonest intention at the inception of the transaction. In the present case, respondent No.2 could have taken recourse to civil remedy but the continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioners would be nothing but an abuse of process of law. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. FIR No. 57 dated 03.06.2009 (Annexure P-4), under Sections 406, 420 IPC, registered at Police Station Bhadson, District Patiala, and all subsequent proceedings, arising therefrom, are quashed. (SABINA) JUDGE August 24, 2011 Gurpreet