The court established that civil disputes should not be cloaked as criminal offenses, allowing for quashing of FIRs when no criminal offense is disclosed.

ORDER

1. Petitioners have preferred this Criminal Misc. Petition seeking quashing of complaint which was registered as FIR No.82/2020, at Police Station Makrana, District Nagaur, for the offence under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 120-B IPC.

2. It is contended by counsel for the petitioners that petitioner No.1 has purchased l/28th share of the property from Sabra vide registered sale deed dated 25.09.2019. It is contended that petitioner No.1 is a bonafide purchaser for consideration. The property in question in revenue record was shown in the name of Sabra and there is no allegation in the FIR that the sale deed registered by Sabra is forged. It is contended that the FIR does not disclose commission of any offence. It is contended that the complainant himself purchased l/36th share of the property vide registered sale deed dated 25.01.1990 from Manjur Ali and similarly petitioner No.1 has purchased l/28th share from Sabra.

3. It is also contended that a partition suit and suit for cancellation of sale deed have been filed by Abdul Gani with regard to the property sold by Sabra to the petitioner No.1. It is contended that a civil dispute has been given a look of criminal offence. No offence under Sections 467, 468, 471, 420 and 120-B of IPC are made out from bare perusal of the FIR. It is also contended that the son and wife of petitioner No.1 have also been implicated as an accused in the FIR when admittedly the sale deed was executed in favour of the petitioner No.1 and his wife and son have nothing to do with the purchase of property.

4. Counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on Ashok Kumar Padhy vs. ICFAI Foundation and Anr. 2018 CRI.L.J. 3646, wherein the Court observed that the dispute was of civil nature, which was given colour of criminal offence and thus, order taking cognizance was quashed and set aside.

5. Reliance is also placed on Praramjeet Batra vs. State of Uttarakhand & Ors. 2013 Cr.L.R. (SC) 67, wherein it was observed by the Apex Court that if a civil remedy is available and in fact adopted, the High Court should not hesitate to quash the criminal proceedings. Apex Court further observed that if the High Court comes to the conclusion that dispute which essentially is ofa civil nature is given a cloak of criminal offence, High Court should quash the proceedings.

6. Reliance is also placed on Md. Ibrahim & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Anr. 2009 Cr.L.R. (SC) 746, wherein the Court observed that growing tendency of complainants attempting to give the cloak of a criminal offence to matters which are essentially and purely civil in nature, obviously either to apply pressure on the accused, or out of enmity towards the accused, or to subject the accused to harassment. The Apex Court directed the Courts to ensure that the proceedings before it are not used for settling scores or to pressurize parties to settle civil dispute.

7. Reliance is also placed on Ganesh Dan vs. State of Rajashtan & Anr. 2012(4) Cr.L.R. (Raj) 1984, wherein there was a property dispute and none of the signatures were found to be forged. Thus, the criminal proceedings for offence under Sections 468 & 471 were not found to be made out and the FIR was quashed.

8. Reliance is also placed on Sardar AM Khan vs. State of Uttar Pradesh 2021 (1) CJ (Crl.)(SC) 488. wherein there was no allegation of impersonation and forgery of the signatures. The Court observed that continuation of the proceedings would tantamount to abuse of the process of the Court and the proceedings were quashed.

9. Counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed the misc. petition. It is argued that Courts cannot enter into the merits of the case and stall the investigation. It is contended that in the revenue records, the name of Sabra was added in the year 2019 and immediately, thereafter, the sale deed was registered which goes to show that there was criminal intent. It is also contended that petitioners have done under cutting in the property and have done mining beneath the pro