Allowed

Abrar Ahmad and Another v. Smt. Sajida Begum and Another

Allahabad HC12 Aug 2024A482/10536/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Court held that the dispute between the applicant-vendee and respondent-vendor regarding payment and sale deed execution was essentially civil in nature. Citing A.M. Mohan, the High Court quashed the summoning order under Sections 406 and 420 IPC as an attempt to convert a civil dispute into a criminal case.

What did the court decide?

The impugned summoning order dated 01.03.2024 and entire proceedings qua to the applicants were quashed.

Abrar Ahmad and Another vs Smt. Sajida Begum and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:130141

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10536 of 2024 Applicant :- Abrar Ahmad And Another Opposite Party :- Smt. Sajida Begum And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Araf Khan,Lihazur Rahman Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kamlesh Kumar Mishra

¶4

Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

¶5

Heard Sri N.I. Jafri, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Lihazur R. Khan, learned counsel for applicants and Sri Vidya Kant Tripathi, Advocate holding brief of Sri Kamlesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for Opposite Party No. 1.

¶6

In the present case applicants before this Court are vendees whereas Opposite Party No. 2 is the vendor. It is not under much dispute that an agreement was entered between parties and substantial amount of agreement was paid by vendees to vendor which is admitted in complaint also.

¶7

Complainant has filed a complaint essentially on ground that vendees are not paying rest of amount and, therefore, agreement to sell was not completed as well as that a transfer memo has already been procured from authority which was in possession of vendees.

¶8

Learned Senior Advocate appearing for applicants submits that facts of present case are essentially of civil nature which has been given a criminal color only to harass the applicants. He also submits that even if the contents of complaint as well as statements so recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. are taken on face of it as gospel truth, still no offence can be made out under Sections 406, 420 IPC. He placed reliance on a recent judgment of Supreme Court in A.M. Mohan Vs. State Represented by SHO and another, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 339 and relevant paragraph thereof is reproduced hereinafter:

¶9

“ 10. The Court has also noted the concern with regard to a growing tendency in business circles to convert purely civil disputes into criminal cases. The Court observed that this is obviously on account of a prevalent impression that civil law remedies are time consuming and do not adequately protect the interests of lenders/creditors. The Court also

¶10

recorded that there is an impression that if a person could somehow be entangled in a criminal prosecution, there is a likelihood of imminent settlement. The Court, relying on the law laid down by it in the case of G. Sagar Suri v. State of U.P. held that any effort to settle civil disputes and claims, which do not involve any criminal offence, by applying pressure through criminal prosecution should be deprecated and discouraged. The Court also observed that though no one with a legitimate cause or grievance should be prevented from seeking remedies available in criminal law, a complainant who initiates or persists with a prosecution, being fully aware that the criminal proceedings are unwarranted and his remedy lies only in civil law, should himself be made accountable, at the end of such misconceived criminal proceedings, in accordance with law.”

¶11

Learned counsel appearing for Opposite Party No. 1, i.e., complainant, refers the later part of impugned order that Trial Court has assigned reasons to summon applicants under Sections 406, 420 IPC.

¶12

Impugned summoning order dated 01.03.2024 in its entirety is reproduced hereinafter:

¶13

"पतत्रावलली पपेश हहई।

¶14

न्यत्रायत्रालय दत् र ात्रा पररवत्रादली कपे ववदत्रान अधधिवकत्रा कको ससुनत्रा गयत्रा तथत्रा पतत्रावलली कत्रा अवलकोकन वकयत्रा गयत्रा।

¶15

पररवत्राद कपे कथननों कपे अन स ुत् र ा पररवत्रावदनली मवहलत्रा उद्यवमतत्रा हहै। पत्राथर्थीनली कपे नत्राम पर एक भभूवम धजिसकत्रा रकबत्रा लगभग 624.60 वगरमलीटर हहै जिको तसुगलपसुर हल्ददौनत्रा गत्राम मम ससथत हहै। कसुछ वदन पहलपे 2 पप्रॉपटटली डलीलर शली ममंजिभूर अहमद और नबलील खत्रामंन पत्राथर्थीनली सपे इस, प्लत्राट कको बमचनपे ककी बत्रावत बत्रात वकयत्रा और अबरत् र ा अहमद सपे मलीवटमंग करत्रायली पत्राथर्थीनली और अबरत् र ा अहमद कपे बलीच इस प्लत्राट कपे धलए बत्रातचलीत हहई और पवतमलीटर रूपयपे 33 हजित् र ा कपे दर सपे इस प्लत्राट कत्रा सदौदली हहआ ब्यत्रानत्रा कपे रूप मम अबरत् र ा अहमद नपे पत्राथर्थीनली कको पमंजित्राब नपेशनल बबक खत्रान मत्रावकरट बत्रामंच कत्रा एक चहैक समंख्यत्रा-726670 जिको 10 लत्राख रू० कत्रा थत्रा पत्राथर्थीनली कको वदयत्रा धजिसककी वतधथ 01.06.2022 थली, उसली समय, पत्राथर्थीनली सपे पपेच्ह नकोएडत्रा औधिकोवगक ववकत्रास पत्राधधिकरण सपे सम्बसन्धित कई

¶16

दसतत्रावपेजिको पर हसतत्राक्षर करवत्रायपे गयपे अबरत् र ा अहमद ककी कथन कपे अन स ुत् र ा पत्राथर्थीनली उस चहैक कको अपनपे बबक मम कहैश कहैश करत्रानपे कपे धलए जिमत्रा वकयत्रा 'तको यह जित्रानकर उस हहैरत हहई वक अबरत् र ा अहमद नपे वकसली और और व्यवक कत्रा चहैक पत्राथर्थीनली कको धिकोखत्रा दपेनपे कपे उदपेश्य सपे दपे वदयत्रा हहै। धजिसककी सभूचनत्रा पत्राथर्थीनली नपे शलीघ्र हली अबरत् र ा अहमद कको वदयत्रा। पत्राथर्थीनली ककी बत्रात कको ससुनकर अबरत् र ा अहमद नपे ककोई सन्तकोषपभूवरक जिबत्राव नहली वदयत्रा कसुछ समय बत्राद अबरत् र ा अहमद नपे पत्राथर्थीनली कपे बबक अकत्राउट मम एक करकोड ककी रत्रावश जिमत्रा करत्रा वदयत्रा। इसली बलीच अबरत् र ा अहमद उनकत्रा पसुत और दकोनको पप्रॉपटर्थी डलीलरको नपे छल पभूवरक पत्राधधिकरण सपे हसतत्रानतरण पमत्राण पत वनकत्राल धलयत्रा जिबवक पत्राथर्थीनली कत्रा एक करकोड 6 लत्राख 11 हजित् र ा 8 सदौ रू० अभली भली अबरत् र ा अहमद कपे पत्रास बकत्रायत्रा हहै। दकोनको पकोपटर्थी डलीलरको नपे पत्राथर्थीनली कको बतत्रायत्रा वक हसतत्ामंण पत पत्राधधिकरण सपे उन लकोगको नपे र पत्राप्त कर धलयत्रा हहै। और पत्राथर्थीनली कको इसली धिनरत्रावश मम भभूवम कत्रा पमंजिलीकरण अबरत् र अहमद कको करनत्रा हकोगत्रा। पत्राधथरनली अपनपे वककील सपे कत्रानभूनली सलत्राह धलयत्रा और वदनत्रामंक 08.07.2022 कको अपनपे वककील कपे मत्राध्यम सपे एक कत्रानभूनली नकोवटस अबरत् र ा अहमद कको भपेजि वदयत्रा। और उनकपे मकोबत्राइल पर भली वत्राह्टसएप कपे मत्राध्यम सपे भपेजि वदयत्रा तको उन्हकोनपे पत्राप्त कर धलयत्रा जिको समंलग्न हहै। अब यपे लकोग पत्राधथरनली कपे बच्चपे तको उठत्रा लपेनपे ककी धिमककी दपे रहपे। पत्राधथरनली व पत्राधथरनली कत्रा पररवत् र ा डरत्रा व सहमत्रा हहआ हहै। पत्राधथरनली कको डर हहै वक अबरत् र ा अहमद ककोई अवपय घटनत्रा घवटत न कर दपे।

¶17

पररवत्रादली दत् र ात्रा पररवत्राद पत कपे समथरन मम आधित् र ा कत्राडर ककी छत्रायत्रा पवत, थत्रानत्राध्यक्ष, थत्रानत्रा बलीटत्रा-2, गदौतमबसुद्धनगर कको वदयपे गयपे पत्राथरनत्रा पत ककी पवत, ललीगल नकोवटस ककी पवत, बबक सटपेटममट ककी पवत, एगलीममट टभू सपेल ककी छत्रायत्रा पवत, व्हत्राटट सअप चहैट ककी पवत, गपेटर नकोएडत्रा कपे अमंतरण जत्रापन ककी पवत, ललीगल नकोवटस ककी छत्रायत्रा पवत, चहैक ककी छत्रायत्रा पवत, नकोवटस अमंतगरत धित् र ात्रा 111 दमं०प०समं० ककी छत्रायत्रा पवत पसतसुत ककी गयली। पररवत्रादनली दत् र ात्रा अपनपे कथन कपे समथरन मम बबक टटत्रामंजिपेक्शन ककी पवत दत्राधखल ककी गयली हहै, धजिसमम अबरत् र ा अहमद दत् र ात्रा टटत्रामंजिपेक्शन वकयत्रा जित्रानत्रा उवल्लिधखत हहै तथत्रा एगलीममट टभू सपेल पर ववपक्षली समंख्यत्रा-2 कत्रा हसतत्राक्षर हहै, धजिसमम ववपक्षली समंख्यत्रा 2 कपेतत्रा कपे रूप मम दवशरत हहै। पथम दृष्टयत्रा ऐसत्रा पतलीत हकोतत्रा हहै वक धलधखत शतरमं कत्रा अनसुपत्रालन दसुवषत मत्रानधसकतत्रा सपे ववपक्षली समंख्यत्रा-1 व 2 दत् र ात्रा नहहीं वकयत्रा गयत्रा हहै, जिको वक धित् र ात्रा 406 भत्रा०दमं० समं० कपे अमंतगरत दण्डनलीय अपरत्राधि हहै। अततः ववपक्षली समंख्यत्रा-1 व 2 कको धित् र ात्रा 406 भत्रा०द०समं०

¶18

कपे अमंतगरत तलब वकयपे जित्रानपे ककी आधित् र ा पयत्ाप्त हहै। पररवत्रादली कत्रा बयत्रान अमंतगरत धित् र र ात्रा 200 व सत्राथली नफकीस खत्रान कत्रा बयत्रान अमंतगरत धित् र ात्रा 202 दमं०प०समं० अमंवकत वकयत्रा गयत्रा, धजिसमम उन्हनोंनपे पररवत्राद मम वकयपे गयपे कथननों कत्रा समथरन वकयत्रा। पररवत्राद पत एवमं पसतसुत सत्राक्ष्य कपे अवलकोकन सपे पथम दृष्टयत्रा ववपक्षलीगण समंख्यत्रा - 1 व 2 कको धित् र ात्रा 406, 420 भत्रा०दमं०समं० कपे अमंतगरत तलब वकयपे जित्रानपे कत्रा आधित् र ा पयत्ाप्त हहै। र

¶19

आदपेश

¶20

ववपक्षलीगण समंख्यत्रा-1 अबरत् र ा अहमद व ववपक्षली समं० -2 अरफत्रात अबरत् र ा कको धित् र ात्रा 406,420 भत्रा०दमं०समं० कपे अपरत्राधि हपेतसु जिररयपे समन तलब वकयत्रा जित्रातत्रा हहै।

¶21

पररवत्रादली वनयमत्रान स ुत् र ा पहैरवली अमंदर एक सप् त ह करम। पतत्रावलली वत्रासतपे हत्राधजिरली वदनत्रामंक 01.04.2024 कको पपेश हको।"

¶22

From above referred operative part of impugned order it is evident that the only reason assigned is with regard to offence under Section 406 IPC and no reason has been assigned to summon applicants under Section 420 IPC.

¶23

Even for the purpose of Section 406 IPC, it may be a case of vice versa as the vendees have already paid a substantial amount and now execution of sale deed is being under dispute, therefore, entrustment, if any, was by vendor and not by vendees.

¶24

At this stage, Court also takes note that vendees have already filed a suit for specific performance in October 2022, i.e., just after the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was filed by complainant.

¶25

In aforesaid circumstances, this case is squarely covered by the judgment referred above in A.M. Mohan (supra), therefore, the Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to invoke inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 11. In the result, application is allowed. Impugned summoning order dated 01.03.2024 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate III, Gautambudh Nagar in Complaint Case No. 10380 of 2023 (Sajida Begum vs. Abrar Ahmad and others), under Sections 406, 420 IPC, Police Station Beata-2, District Gautambudh Nagar as well as entire proceedings thereof, qua to applicants, are hereby quashed.

¶26

Order Date :- 12.8.2024/AK

¶27

Digitally signed by :- AWADESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Abrar Ahmad and Another v. Smt. Sajida Begum and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abrar Ahmad and Another v. Smt. Sajida Begum and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajnesh Singh and 6 Others vs State of Up and Another

Vikas Jain vs State of U.P. and Another

Hasmat Alias Chhote vs State of Up and 9 Others

Sunil Kumar vs State of Up and 3 Others

Bhupendra Kumar Mishra Alias Bhonu vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Sanno B and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another