SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(P&H) 21

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J.
Rajbir Gehlawat and another - Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others - Respondents
CRM-M-50132-2019
Decided On : 20-04-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Akshat Gupta, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Rajiv Goel, DAG, Haryana.

The central legal point established in the judgment is the need for a thorough probe and the legitimacy of justice over legal devices in the application of legal provisions.

Headnote:

Section 482 Cr.PC - Seeking directions in FIR No.140 dated 25.02.2015/26.02.2015 registered under Sections 420/406/120-B/34 IPC, 1860 and Sections 4/42/76 of the Chit Fund Act, 1982 - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the application of Section 102 Cr.PC in relation to the seizure of properties and the legal provisions governing the attachment of properties in connection with an offence. The court also highlighted the investigation deficiencies and the potential for supplementary challan against the accused. The judgment emphasized the need for a thorough probe and the legitimacy of justice over clever legal devices.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners sought directions in a case involving allegations of cheating and chit fund fraud. They claimed to be innocent and victims of false implication by the complainant and investigating agency. The properties of the petitioners were allegedly seized and attached illegally.

Finding of the Court:

The court dismissed the petition, stating that there was no violation of Section 102 Cr.PC as alleged by the petitioners.

Issues: The issues revolved around the legality of property seizure, the adequacy of investigation, and the potential for supplementary challan against the accused.

Ratio Decidendi: The judgment emphasized the need for a thorough probe, highlighted the legitimacy of justice over legal devices, and clarified the application of Section 102 Cr.PC in relation to property seizure.

Final Decision: The petition was dismissed due to the court's finding that there was no violation of Section 102 Cr.PC as alleged by the petitioners.

JUDGMENT :

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J.

1. The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.PC for seeking appropriate directions in FIR No.140 dated 25.02.2015/26.02.2015 registered under Sections 420/406/120-B/34 IPC, 1860 and Sections 4/42/76 of the Chit Fund Act, 1982 at Police Station Sonipat, Haryana.

2. The case of the petitioners in brief as urged by the learned counsel for the petitioners may be noticed as under:

That they had been made a scapegoat by one Raj Bala (complainant) and certain other unknown persons with an oblique motive to pressurize and extract money from them even though they were not even remotely connected with any of the alleged offences in the FIR in question and the investigating agency and the complainant in collusion with each other had thereafter foisted a false and fabricated case upon them. It was in fact the complainant Raj Bala, who befriended petitioner No.2 Rani in the year 2014 and thereafter on winning her confidence, lured her to invest her money in a “committee business”, which was being run by the former. However, no sooner did petitioner No.2 realise that Raj Bala-complainant was illegally running the aforementioned business and had been duping innocent people of large sums of money, she immediately stopped investing her money in the committee. It was thus, in this background that the complainant by way of a pre-emptive move, in order to thwart any criminal case being registered against her for her illegal activities, got the FIR in question registered against the petitioners. Learned counsel has also submitted that petitioner No.2 had lodged a complaint against the complainant Raj Bala and her son, who is a police official, on 17.12.2014 but to their dismay, the police officials for reasons best known to them and rather obvious, failed to act on her complaint. Thereafter, the petitioners were continuously subjected to harassment and given threats of dire consequences including false implication in cases. Subsequently, in the year 2016, the complainant Rajbala resolved and settled the dispute with the petitioners wherein she gave an affidavit to the effect that she did not want to continue with any proceedings against them. It was therefore, urged that the factum of the complainant arriving at a settlement with the petitioners further left no manner of doubt that the petitioners were indeed innocent and had been victims of false implication at the hands of complainant and the investigating agency.

3. Learned counsel has invited the attention of this Court to Annexure P-3 dated 27.09.2019, which was a communication sent to petitioner No.2 Rani Gehlawat, wife of petitioner No.1- Rajbir Gehlawat vide which she had been intimated by the Estate officer, HSVP Sonipat, HSVP Complex, Sector-15, Sonipat, Haryana, that a letter had been received from the Police Chowki, Sector 23, Sonipat on 04.03.2015 wherein he had been directed not to permit the sale or transfer of various immoveable properties including House No.1911, Sector 23, Sonipat. Learned counsel has submitted that it was only on receipt of the aforementioned communication it came to the notice of the petitioners that the following properties had also been seized, attached or blocked from being sold or transferred by the investigating agency:

Properties belonging to petitioner No.1:

(i) Account bearing No.60441140129094, bank: HDFC Bank, Branch: Gurgaon, Haryana.

(ii) Mahindra XUV (Car) bearing No.HR 10U 2006

(iii) Mahindra Quanto (Car) bearing No.HR 10 U 3323

(iv) House No.1911, Sector 23, Sonipat, Haryana (owned jointly by petitioners No.1 and 2)

Properties belonging to petitioner No.2:

(i) House No.1911, Sector 23, Sonipat, Haryana (owned jointly by petitioners No.1 and 2)

(ii) Shop No.19, Sector 23, Sonipat, Haryana

(iii) DSO No.25, Sector 23, Sonipat, Haryana

(iv) Plot No.1983, Sector 23, Sonipat, Haryana

(v) Ford Eco Sport (Car) bearing No.HR 10 V 4060

(vi) Account bearing No.107810011060729; Bank: Andhra Bank; Branch: Vasant Kunj, New Delh

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top