Petitioners sought to set aside summoning orders under Article 227, arguing the case was a civil dispute colored as criminal. Court found fraud was committed by fabricating receipts of returned money, noting it exceeded civil scope.
Petition to set aside summoning orders dismissed; courts below orders upheld.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 91
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 5228 of 2022 Petitioner :- Rohit Agarwal And 3 Others Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Ali Jamal Khan,Nasira Adil,Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Pranshu Gupta
Hon'ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma,J.
An FIR was registered against four petitioners by the informantopposite party no. 2 alleging that he was on friendly terms with Rohit Agarwal and his wife-Smt. Akansha, petitioner nos. 1 and 2 respectively; the petitioner nos. 1 to 4 came to his house with an offer for sale of their flat no. B-303, Golden Tower, Laxmi Vihar, Police Station-Medical, District-Meerut at discounted price, as they needed some money; they tricked him into entering into the disputed transaction of money; the informant paid them a Rs. 6,50,000/- in cash and further amount of Rs. 10,50,000/- through different cheques; the petitioners assured him to give him the vacant possession of the flat once those cheques were encashed and to execute the sale deed in his favour; however, the petitioners neither executed the sale deed nor gave him the possession of the flat. The informant was defrauded of his hard earned money by the petitioners in pursuance of the conspiracy hatched by all four of them; it is stated in the FIR that the informant is 86 years old retired Colonel, who had served the Indian Army in the war of 1962, 1965 and 1971, was targeted by the
petitioners in most clever fashion; after investigation a final report was submitted by the investigation officer on the basis of the fact that the money which was received by the petitioners was returned to the informant; a protest application was filed on behalf of the informant, which was allowed and the petitioners were summoned under Sections 420, 467 IPC to face trial; the revision filed on behalf of the petitioner was also dismissed and the order of the Magistrate was confirmed.
fabricated receipts which were from the diary admittedly belonging to the petitioners and been in their possession and maintained by them and that these receipts were prepared to hoodwink the victim/informant and the investigating officer as well to pilfer and misappropriate his hard earned money. And each one of them acted in tandem finding an old retired army personnel a soft target.
Order Date :- 20.12.2022 Vik/-
Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the dispute involving alleged return of advance money and alleged fabrication of receipts by petitioners has spilled beyond the scope of a purely civil dispute.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Mitesh Kumar J. Sha vs. The State of Karnataka and OthersReferred¶10
Criminal Appeal No. 1285 of 2021 (Mitesh Kumar J. Sha vs. The State of Karnataka and Others) decided on 26.10.2021
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rohit Agarwal And 3 Others
State of U.P.
Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
