occur in cash without receipts or acknowledgments. The allegation regarding the issuance of undated cheques is also baseless; neither the cheques were ever given to the respondent No.2 to the petitioner, nor were they encashed. It is also contended that the petitioner, way back on 14.03.2023, had reported a complaint regarding the loss and misplacement of several original pattas in respect of the multiple projects being undertaken by him, including the Patta of the plots in question in the impugned FIR. The petitioner has placed Annexure-5, showing the list of Pattas missing. It is also contended that the petitioner, under the notice issued by the Investigating Officer, had given a detailed representation along with the relevant documents, and the Investigating Authority, being convinced by the same, had even proposed a negative final report and reported that the matter pertains to a civil nature of dispute between the parties. Thereafter, the Investigating Authorities were influenced by External Authorities and reopened the matter for further investigation. In the guise of an additional investigation, they force the petitioner to settle and resolve the dispute. No fresh material is available to the Investigating Agency to proceed with further investigation against the petitioners. It is contended that the impugned FIR is frivolous, mala fide and a gross abuse of process of law and deserves to be quashed.
