Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 1288 (PNJ)

Piara Singh v. State of Punjab

2012-09-25

PARAMJEET SINGH

body2012
JUDGMENT Mr. Paramjeet Singh, J.: (Oral) - The present petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in case arising out of FIR No. 66 dated 12.6.2012, registered at Police Station Dera Baba Nanak, District Gurdaspur, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC. 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner, a GPA of the complainant, has entered into an agreement with one Satwinder Singh on 18.8.2011 for sale of the land of the complainant @ Rs.7.50 lacs per acre. The alleged agreement is stated to be an oral agreement. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further contends that the petitioner had received Rs.15.00 lacs as earnest money. The prospective vendee backed out from the agreement, as a result of which Rs.2.00 lacs were forfeited and Rs.13.00 lacs were returned to him. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further contends that in the area, rates of the land are not more than Rs.7.50 lacs per acre. 3. I have considered the contentions of learned Counsel for the petitioner and have perused the FIR. 4. It would be appropriate to mention here that the petitioner is the sister’s husband of the complainant and he was appointed as GPA as the complainant was staying in USA. It appears that now-a-days people are turning away from relations for petty gains. and the petitioner appears to have taken advantage of the fact that the complainant is staying abroad and is not aware of the fact situation in the ancestral village to which the petitioner belongs. In para 4 of the FIR, it has been specifically mentioned that the petitioner has informed the complainant that agreement has been entered into with one Satwinder Singh for a sale consideration of Rs.14.10 lacs per acre and sale deed was to be executed on 21.4.2012. Since the entire transaction, as alleged by the petitioner, is oral, it is quite possible that the petitioner might have informed the complainant correctly regarding the transaction but subsequently the land was sold @ Rs.7.50 lacs per acre thereby causing loss of more than Rs.1.90 crores. 5. It is a common practice that the sale deeds are registered in the State of Punjab at the minimum rate prescribed by the Collector, and the exact market value of the agricultural land is not reflected in the sale deeds. Actually market value is much higher. 5. It is a common practice that the sale deeds are registered in the State of Punjab at the minimum rate prescribed by the Collector, and the exact market value of the agricultural land is not reflected in the sale deeds. Actually market value is much higher. Admittedly, the petitioner has misused the faith reposed in him by brother of his wife. In these circumstances, it is apparent from the FIR that the complainant has been defrauded to the tune of more than Rs.1.00 crores. This is improbable that some body who is paying Rs.15.00 lacs will not enter into a written agreement. With regard to agricultural land, oral evidence cannot be accepted; the land has to be identified by khasra numbers and the location and everything is to be taken care of when the agreement is executed. It is also to be taken care that whether or not the land is having any other incumbrance over it. In these circumstances, no prudent man can enter into an agreement orally, specifically when he is a stranger. It is more difficult to forgive a breach of trust than other misdemeanors because a person’s trust in another is closed tied up with his belief system. 6. In the present case, custodial interrogation is a necessity and recovery of the amount in question is also required to be effected. 7. No ground for the grant of anticipatory bail is made out. 8. Dismissed.