The court upheld that an FIR alleging fraud and forgery must be investigated, regardless of ongoing civil disputes, as it constitutes a serious offence under the IPC.

ORAL ORDER

1. By way of this petition, the applicant has prayed for quashing and setting aside FIR No.11210070240773 of 2024 registered with Bhestan Police Station, Surat City registered on 27.6.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468 , 471 and 474 of the Indian Penal Code .

2. As per the FIR which is registered by one Maheshbhai B. Patel, it is stated that he is the owner of land situated at Survey No.102/1 Block No.132, Khata No.257 admeasuring 2-47-87 Hectare - RA - Sq. Mts. in the Town Planning Scheme No.59 (Unn) Final Plot No.111 of old tenure land and as the complainant was not knowing anyone and as he wanted to sell the land, he told one Shakilbhai Abdul Gafur Qureshi to intimate if there is any prospective buyer of the land. Shakilbhai thereafter informed him that one of his friend is at Surat is having one party and he wants to purchase the land. Ultimately, he introduced the complainant to the present applicant as well as one Natvarbhai. A meeting took place wherein four persons were present. The applicant, Natvarbhai, complainant and Shakilbhai and after the formal talks, as the applicant did not show any interest in purchasing the land, the meeting ended without any fruitful result.

2.1 Thereafter, as the complainant wanted to sell the land, he gave a public notice in the Gujarat Mitra, local newspaper on 25.9.2023 and in response to the said notice, on 30.9.2023 in Gujarat Mitra newspaper, the applicant replied to the said notice and intimated that he is having an agreement to sell in respect of the land in question and as the complainant has accepted the aforesaid payment and thereafter has changed the mind and is not executing the Sale Deed, as stated in the notice, the complainant was supposed to note that. However, immediately thereafter on 8.11.2023, he received a Summons from the Court of learned 19th Additional Senior Civil Judge in respect of Special Civil Suit No.245 of 2023 which was preferred by the present applicant indicating that the land was decided to be sold at a consideration of Rs.27,21,41,100/- and that on 6.1.2022, an agreement to sell was executed and for specific performance of the aforesaid agreement to sell, the suit is preferred.

2.2 As per the suit, the consideration of Rs.1 Crores was paid in cash to the complainant and as the purchaser name and the present applicant was shown was in Gujarati and the signature of the complainant was in Gujarati, it was alleged by the complainant that it was not the signature of the complainant. According to the FIR, the complainant had met the present applicant only once in presence of Shakilbhai and Natvarbhai and he has not received any amount nor executed any agreement to sell. The complainant also gave photocopy of the agreement to sell which was produced in the Court and produced to the Handwriting Expert and as per the opinion of the Handwriting expert also, the agreement to sell was not signed by the present complainant and, therefore, the FIR is registered against the applicant.

3. Learned advocate Mr. Premal Rachh appearing with Mr. S. M. Kikani for the applicant made following submissions :-

3.1 That the FIR is registered belatedly in June 24 and before that when the complainant approached another Police Station with a complaint, the concerned Investigating Officer did not register the complaint of the complainant by recording as FIR on the ground that civil dispute is pending between the parties.

3.2 Even in Special Civil Suit No.245 of 2023 preferred by the applicant, learned 19 th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Surat vide order dated 19.2.2024 has granted interim injunction in favour of the applicant and directed the parties to maintain status-quo in respect of the suit land in question. However, when the said order was challenged before this Court in Appeal From Order No.45 of 2024, this Court vide order dated 14.3.2024 vacated the injunction granted by the learned Trial Court and allowed the said Appeal From Order. The