Cheating--Agreement to Sell--Civil litigation based on an agreement to sell where the proposed purchaser himself has defaulted in getting the sale deed executed and later on, resorted to criminal litigation is likely to be quashed

ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J.

1. Prayer in this petition is for quashing of complaint No.250 dated 15.06.2011 (Annexure P2) as well as the order dated 16.09.2015 (Annexure P5) passed by the trial Court.

2. Brief facts of the case are that respondent No.2/complainant has filed a criminal complaint No.250 dated 15.06.2011 (Annexure P2) with the allegations that the complainant and his partner namely Khajinder Singh were approached by the petitioner/accused – Surjit Singh, being owner of land measuring 32 kanals 07 marlas situation in village Kala Ghanupur, District Amritsar. It is further stated in the complaint that the petitioner allured the complainant and his partner to purchase the aforesaid property at the rate of Rs.25 lacs per acre and on such inducement, believing that the land of the petitioner is free from all encumbrances and is having a clear title, the complainant and his partner entered into an agreement to sell to purchase the land on 03.05.2005 and paid an amount of Rs.10 lacs as earnest money out of total sale consideration. The stipulated date for execution of the sale deed was fixed as 03.05.2006. It is further stated in the complaint that prior to the aforesaid date, on 10.06.2005, the accused/petitioner in furtherance of his evil intention of cheating the complainant by practicing fraud, further received Rs.25 lacs from the complainant and his partner and passed on the possession of the land measuring 01 acre i.e. 07 kanals 19 marlas in favour of the complainant and his partner by executing a power of attorney and a Will in their favour. The said land was further sold by the complainant party to one Harcharan Singh, for Rs.20 lacs and he is now in possession of the same.

3. It is further stated in the complaint that after 01.06.2005, the intention of the petitioner/accused became dishonest and he refused to get the sale deed executed in terms of the agreement to sell dated 03.05.2005. Thereafter, the complainant and his partner filed a suit for possession by way of specific performance, which is pending before the Civil Court. It is also stated in the complaint that later on, the complainant came to know that a suit has been filed by one Jaskarandeep Singh against the petitioner prior to agreement to sell dated 03.05.2005 on the basis of a family settlement. The said Jaskarandeep Singh is son of real brother of the accused. It is further stated in the complaint that Jaskarandeep Singh and Surjit Singh (the present petitioner) had entered into a family settlement and the petitioner consented to keep 1/2 share out of the aforesaid 33 kanals 07 marlas of land (subject-matter of the agreement to sell dated 03.05.2005) and the remaining 1/2 share was given to Jaskarandeep Singh.

4. With the aforesaid allegations, the complaint No.250 dated 15.06.2011 (Annexure P2) was filed that a fraud has been committed with the complainants, who have been induced to pay the earnest money as the property was not free from any encumbrances and had a disputed title.

5. Thereafter, the complainant led his preliminary evidence and appeared himself as CW1 and stated on the line of the version given in the complaint.

6. Khajinder Singh was examined as CW2, who also deposed on the same line.

7. One of the attesting witness to the agreement to sell namely Ravinder Singh appeared as CW3 and proved the same.

8. Thereafter, the complainant tendered into evidence certified copy of the family settlement (Ex.CX/1) dated 12.05.2002, allegedly entered into between the petitioner/accused namely Surjit Singh and Jaskarandeep Singh, which is the sole basis on which the impugned complaint was filed.

9. The trial Court on the basis of the preliminary evidence holding that the petitioner/accused as per the family settlement dated 12.05.2005 was not owner of the whole property i.e. 33 kanals 07 marlas, therefore, fraudulently entered into agreement to sell dated 03.05.2005 and induced the complainant to pay the earnest money and summoned him under Secti