IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
H.S.GREWAL, J.
Parveen Nain And Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana And Another – Respondents
CRM-M-48399 of 2022 (O&M)
Decided On : 23-02-2026
JUDGMENT :
H.S. GREWAL, J.
The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No.0028 dated 13.01.2022 under Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC registered at Police Station City Sonipat, District Sonipat (Annexure P-1) alongwith all consequential proceedings arising therefrom including the challan (Annexure P-3) under Sections 120-B, 180, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC filed against the petitioners as no offence is made out rather a civil dispute has been given the colour of criminality.
2. Brief facts of the present case are that the complainant Ajay Kumar alias Ajay son of Shri Dariya Tehsil and District Sonepat was owner and in possession of land comprised in Rect. and Killa No.2/25 (1-4), 3/21 (3-0), 22 (0- 17), 5/1 (8-0), 2(8-0), 3 (5-11), 4 (1-11), 6 (4-7), 7/1 (2-0), 7/2 (6-0), 8 (7-4), 9 (8- 0), 10 (8-0), 11 (7-17), 12 (7-11), 13(7-12)14/1 (2-0) 14/2 (6-0), 15 (8-0), 16 (8-0), 18 (8-0), 19/1 Min 4-19, 20/1/1 min (2-7), 5/26 (0-10), 6/5 (7-18), 6 (8-0).
On 29.08.2018, the complainant made deal of 56 Kanals 3 Marlas out of the aforesaid land with accused Nos.1 and 2 at the rate of Rs.1.25 crore per acre and in the agreement the date for registration was fixed as 07.03.2019. However, the accused No.1 and 2 could not arrange the balance sale consideration within stipulated time, and sought further time. They also made deal for purchasing his remaining land at the rate of Rs.1.25 crores, for which the complainant gave his consent, upon which the accused prepared three separate agreements on 07.03.2019. In two agreements the rate was mentioned as Rs.1.25 crore per acre and date for registration was fixed as 06.02.2020. However, in one agreement No.13668 instead of Rs.01 crore 25 lacs, the rate was mentioned as only Rs.25 lacs per acre and date for registration of sale deed was fixed as 06.01.2020. The complainant alleged that he agreed to sell his entire land at the rate of Rs.01 crore 25 lacs per acre in the presence of witness Dharminder son of Kartar Singh, resident of village Garhi Bala, whereas all accused in conspiracy with each other, with an intention to swallow his land committed cheating and forgery by preparing three pages of agreement No.13668 and after replacing the pages, showed lesser sale consideration of only Rs.25 lacs per acre, whereas in remaining two agreements, two pages were written, whereas all three agreements were prepared on the same day i.e. 07.03.2019. Till stipulated date i.e. 06.01.2020 the accused could not make arrangement for money and said that they could not arrange money. They requested the return of their earnest money and stated that the complainant may sell his land elsewhere, as complainant’s land is free. Thereafter, on 12.02.2020 the complainant returned Rs.5,00,000/- in cash and gave cheque of Rs.47 lacs to the accused who accepted the entire money and after sufficient time, on the asking of the accused, the complainant sold his land to M/s Celestial Valley LLP vide sale deed dated 07.05.2019. The accused by using the alleged false agreement No.13668 filed false case against the complainant. On receipt of summons from the Court, the complainant came to know about entire forgery done by the accused. When he confronted the accused, the accused asked to get registered the sale deed in their names at the rate of Rs.25 lacs per acre, otherwise he and his family would be ruined. When the complainant told accused that he has returned their money by selling his land and as to why they were doing so with him, then accused said that they want Rs.6 crores, which money be given either by the complainant or the money be got paid from the company to whom he has sold the land and if he failed to pay the money as demanded by them, then he will be shot dead. The complainant apprehend danger to his life and property from the accused.
3. A perusal of the above shows that the main allegations against the petitioners are that they have forged and fabricated an a
Criminal proceedings cannot proceed where allegations only constitute a civil dispute without intent to cheat.
The court established that criminal proceedings cannot be used to settle civil disputes, emphasizing that the FIR lacked allegations constituting a criminal offence and should be quashed.
Criminal prosecution cannot arise from a breach of contract; such grievances are solely civil in nature, thus warranting quashing of the FIR.
Civil disputes should not be framed as criminal offences when no fraudulent intent is evident, as it constitutes an abuse of legal processes.
Civil disputes can involve criminal elements; thus, the existence of a civil remedy does not automatically justify quashing a criminal FIR.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that for an act to constitute an offence under Section 420 of the Penal Code, there must be fraudulent or dishonest inducement, and the absence ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.