Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 1817 (PNJ)

Kulwant Rai v. State Of Punjab

2007-10-10

S.S.SARON

body2007
Judgment S.S.Saron, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This order will dispose of Criminal Misc. No.M-40363 of 2007 filed by Kulwant Rai and Criminal Misc. No.M-33618 of 2007 filed by Om Parkash as they both arise out of the same FIR No.20 dated 7.4.2007 registered at Police Station Malerkotla for the offences under Sections 420, 506 and 34 IPC. 3. The petitioners in the respective petitions Kulwant Rai and Om Parkash are Commission Agents of the firm M/s Om Parkash Kulwant Rai. The FIR in the case has been recorded at the instance of Balwinder Singh and Jamit Singh, who have alleged that an inquiry be conducted with regard to the fraud committed by M/s Om Parkash Kulwant Rai, Commission Agents worth crores of rupees from poor farmers. It is alleged that the petitioners Kulwant Rai and Om Parkash have defrauded poor farmers of crores of rupees. They have not made payment for the crops of Rabi and Kharif and Government bonus due which comes to approximately Rs.2.5 crores. The firm of the petitioners also does the business of property dealing and have lured the poor farmers to sell their land on the pretext that they would buy them another parcel of land on lesser rates. The farmers have been falling into their well laid down plan and have even handed over sale proceeds of the land by selling their land to the petitioners who never returned the money nor purchased the land promised to them. The petitioners are also stated to have gone abroad twice in the last six months. They have sold most of the moveable and immovable properties or transferred the same in the name of their relatives. On the basis of the complaint made an inquiry was marked by ADGP (Crime) to Mr. R.S. Bhullar, SP (Crime). The latter inquired into the complaint which was forwarded to the SSP, Sangrur. The Deputy District Attorney (Legal) also opined to act. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the farmers had taken amount from the petitioners for which pronotes were executed by them. The petitioners have placed on record the pronotes Annexures-A.1 to A.49 executed by various persons in favour of the petitioners. A reference has also been made to the civil suits filed by petitioner Kulwant Rai for the recovery of the amounts on the basis of some of the pronotes. The petitioners have placed on record the pronotes Annexures-A.1 to A.49 executed by various persons in favour of the petitioners. A reference has also been made to the civil suits filed by petitioner Kulwant Rai for the recovery of the amounts on the basis of some of the pronotes. It is, therefore, submitted that the dispute relates to mere money transactions and is purely of a civil nature and no criminal liability can be fastened on the petitioners. A reference has also been made to the report dated 22.9.2006 (Annexure-P.2) of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division, Malerkotla who conducted an inquiry into the matter through the Station House Officer, Malerkotla. It was found that the complainant Balwinder Singh etc. after selling their crops had given money to Kulwant Rai on interest. All of a sudden one Commission Agent in the Grain Market, Dasaunda Singh Wala died and the farmers became apprehensive of their money and thought that Kulwant Rai may refuse to make the payments. Therefore, they started demanding money from Kulwant Rai collectively. On this Kulwant Rai executed pronotes in favour of the farmers. The photo copies of the pronotes have been attached. It has also been found that Kulwant Rai has lodged a case in the Civil Court at Sangrur against the farmers. A list of the persons who owe money to Kulwant Rai and also a list of persons who are to take money from Kulwant Rai is also attached. It was observed that the farmers on their sweet will had given the money to Kulwant Rai and had got the pronotes from him. During the inquiry it was found that the matter pertains to money transaction only. 5. Learned counsel for the State and the complainant have vehemently opposed the applications. It is submitted that the petitioners have duped the farmers of their hard earned money and, therefore, they are not entitled to the concession of bail. Learned counsel for the complainant has further submitted that some of the farmers have even committed suicide. It is also submitted that in case bail is granted to the petitioners they are likely to abscond and go abroad and the farmers would be left in the lurch. It is also submitted that the civil suits that have been filed are of collusive in nature. 6. It is also submitted that in case bail is granted to the petitioners they are likely to abscond and go abroad and the farmers would be left in the lurch. It is also submitted that the civil suits that have been filed are of collusive in nature. 6. After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter and perusing the record, it may be noticed that the petitioners were arrested on 12.4.2007. Thereafter, the challan has been filed on 11.6.2007. The case is now fixed for framing of charge on 18.10.2007. The case is triable by a Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class. The trial in the case is likely to take time. The question whether the dispute between the parties is of a civil nature only or whether it entails criminal consequences also is to be considered and gone into by the Court after evidence in the case has been concluded. At this stage, it would be pre-mature to comment one way or the other. Keeping in view the fact that the challan in the case has been filed, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the petitioners further imprisoned. In the circumstances, both the petitioners in the respective petitions would be entitled to the concession of bail. However, the same would be subject to certain pre-emptory conditions including that of depositing the passports of both the petitioners. Consequently, the criminal miscellaneous petitions are allowed. The petitioners on their furnishing two heavy sureties each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Magistrate shall be admitted to bail. Before their release, they shall deposit/surrender their passports before the trial Court which shall be taken in possession by the trial Court. The petitioners shall not leave the country without permission of the Court.