ORDER : Application for impleadment is allowed. 2. Leave granted. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material. 4. The challenge herein by the accused-appellants is against the order of the High Court refusing to quash the criminal proceedings against the accused-appellants under Sections 420, 406 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 5. According to the complainant, he had given to the accused a sum of Rs. 25,00,000/- (Rupees twenty five lakhs only) as advance for purchase of two plots of land in the year 2006. The accused-appellants, however, did not transfer the said plots by executing the necessary sale deed and instead kept on assuring the complainant that they would be doing so. The complainant accordingly filed the F.I.R. in the year 2014 alleging the offences in question. 6. Admittedly, during this period the complainant had not filed a suit for specific performance nor had taken any measures to enforce the terms/agreement of sale/purchase of land. 7. The above facts would lead us to conclude that the dispute between the parties is primarily civil in nature and it is only after the civil remedy has become barred by time the instant complaint has been filed. Though it is urged before us that the complainant has been misled into believing the false promises of the accused-appellants, according to us, the same cannot be a ground to justify the delayed F.I.R. and the failure on the part of the complainant to have recourse to civil remedies for the redressal of his grievances. We, therefore, are inclined to take the view that in the present case, the High Court was not justified in refusing to quash the proceedings which are liable to be quashed. Accordingly, we allow this appeal and set aside the order of the High Court and quash the criminal proceedings in question.