IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on 07.11.2024 Date of decision: 27.01.2025 Gurcharan Singh Bansal ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KARAMJIT SINGH Argued by: Mr. Abhishek Chaudhary, Advocate for Mr. Aayush Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. J.S. Dhaliwal, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Hitesh Ghai, Advocate for respondent No.2.

****

KARAMJIT SINGH, J.

1. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C is filed seeking quashing of FIR No.102 dated 23.08.2014 (Annexure P-1), registered under Sections 420, 447 and 120-B IPC, at Police Station Jamalpur, Ludhiana and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.

2. The brief facts of the case are that complainant/respondent no.2 Partap Singh lodged complaint with the police to the effect that he purchased one plot measuring 15 marlas comprised of Khasra No.30//6/2, 7,13/2, 14/1, 15/1/1, 17/2 and 18/1 situated in village Tajpur, Tehsil and District Ludhiana, having specific boundaries, from Jasvir Kaur widow of Gurjit Singh vide registered sale deed dated 27.06.1997 Annexure R-1. The possession of the said plot was also handed over to the complainant by the vendor at the time of execution of the sale deed. That petitioner and Dharampal were having no concern with the said plot which is owned and possessed by the complainant. The petitioner, Dharampal along with 5/6 unknown persons made an attempt to take forcible possession of the plot belonging to the complainant and they also threatened to eliminate the complainant. On the basis of the aforesaid complaint, FIR Annexure P-1 was registered against petitioner, Dharampal and 5/6 unknown persons under Sections 420, 447 and 120-B IPC.

3. The counsel for the petitioner while laying challenge to the impugned FIR, has inter alia argued that Jasvir Kaur sold 15 marlas of land out of joint khata to respondent No.2 vide registered sale deed dated 27.06.1997 (Annexure R-1). It has been further argued that it is settled law that the sale of a specific portion out of joint land will be considered as a sale of share out of the joint holding and as such, the petitioner cannot take any benefit of the fact that specific boundaries of the plot in question are given in the registered sale deed dated 27.06.1997. It has been further argued that there is no dispute regarding the fact that out of the said joint khata, the remaining share of Jasvir Kaur was purchased by the present petitioner. It is also settled position of law that a co-sharer cannot be held guilty of criminal trespass qua the land which is jointly possessed by all the co-sharers. In support of his arguments, the counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the decision of this Court in Karamjit Kaur Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others 2014 (7) RCR (Criminal) 1201.

4. The present petition is resisted by the respondents. Respondent No.1 State filed reply by way of affidavit of Gurmeet Singh, Assistant Commissioner of Police, Sahnewal, Ludhiana. Separate reply was filed on behalf of respondent No.2, who also placed on record various documents Annexure R-1 to Annexure R-10.

5. The State counsel and the counsel for respondent No.2, while referring to sale deed Annexure R-1, have submitted that Jasvir Kaur was the owner in possession of plot in question measuring 15 marlas and she sold the same to respondent No.2 vide registered sale deed dated 27.06.1997 and the possession of the plot having specific boundaries as detailed in the sale deed, was handed over to respondent No.2. It has been further argued that petitioner is an influential person and he along with co-accused threatened to take illegal possession of the said plot and petitioner along with Dharampal accompanied by 5/6 unknown persons made an attempt to dispossess respondent No.2 illegally from the plot in question. The counsel for respondent No.2 while referring to revenue record Annexure R-3 to R-10 has further argued that the accused persons including the petiti