9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 1366X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter, 'IPC'). A. FACTS 3. The abovementioned FIR was lodged by the Appellants against Respondent No. 2 and other co-Accused individuals, namely, Shel Narang, Bhim Singh and Vinod. According to the contents of the FIR, the Appellants are senior citizens who were owners and had possession over the land bearing rect. No. 55, Killa No. 3/1 (7-9), 4/1 (7-13), measuring 15 Kanal 2 Marla, situated within the revenue estate of Village Begampur Khatola, Tehsil Kadipur, District Gurugram (hereinafter, 'Subject Land') for over a period of 30 years. The Appellants claim that they never sold the Subject Land to anyone nor have they ever executed any power of attorney (hereinafter, 'GPA') in favor of any third party. The area has, in their version of events, always been unequivocally under their possession and has never been ceded in any form or fashion to people outside the family. 4. On 28.02.2022, Appellant No. 2 went to Patwar Bhawan, Gurugram to obtain revenue papers for the Subject Land. He discovered there only that a person named Bhim Singh Rathi had approached the halqa patwari to sanct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with the unholy intention to whisk the property away from the complainants and place it under the possession of the Accused. 8. Accordingly, the First Information Report was registered at Police Station, Badshahpur, Gurugram, and an investigation was initiated. Respondent No. 2, fearing arrest if he were asked to appear before the Investigating Officer, filed an application for Anticipatory Bail before the Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram. 9. The Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram, dismissed Respondent No. 2's application for anticipatory bail in an order dated 23.05.2022, while observing that: i. Respondent No. 2 was Accused of allegedly forging a GPA and executing the 2022 Sale Deed. The original 1996 GPA was still to be recovered by the police. Several questions pertaining to the whereabouts of the 1996 GPA, the execution of the sale deed, the payment of sale consideration, sanctioning of the mutation, and the relationship between Respondent No. 2 and the Appellants, were all to be ascertained; ii. The allegations against Respondent No. 2 were serious, and filing a civil suit did not absolve them of criminal liability. Anticipatory bail was to be granted only in e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ket Sikri, learned Counsel for the Appellants, vehemently contended that the High Court acted on the erroneous assumption that the alleged 1996 GPA in favor of Respondent No. 2 is genuine. The original copy of 1996 GPA has not been recovered by the police till date, and hence, custodial interrogation is required. Furthermore, the High Court failed to consider that despite the 1996 GPA being executed in favour of Respondent No. 2, he applied for its certified copy only in February 2022, i.e., 26 years later, whereas he should have possessed the original already if his claim is to be bona fide. The present case is one where Respondent No. 2, in collusion with other Accused persons, has carried out an elaborate fraud against the Appellants, who are vulnerable owing to their age and the NRI status. Additionally, the signatures used by Appellant No. 2 during the period between 1990-2000 are dissimilar, unalike and non-identical from those inscribed on the alleged GPA dated 18.09.1996. In addition, the consideration of the alleged sale deed - Rs. 6.60 crores - is far less than the market value of the Subject Land, which is stated to be Rs. 50 crores. 14. Ms. Bansuri Swaraj, learned Addi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rging documents for transferring ownership of land worth crores of rupees are grave in nature. Hence, while it is extremely important to protect the personal liberty of a person, it is equally incumbent upon us to analyze the seriousness of the offence and determine if there is a need for custodial interrogation. 17. In Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra (2011) 1 SCC 694, this Court carefully considered the principles established by the Constitution Bench in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 565 case. After a thorough deliberation, this Court arrived at the following conclusion: 112. The following factors and parameters can be taken into consideration while dealing with anticipatory bail: (i) The nature and gravity of the accusation and the exact role of the Accused must be properly comprehended before arrest is made; (ii) The antecedents of the applicant including the fact as to whether the Accused has previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a court in respect of any cognizable offence; (iii) The possibility of the applicant to flee from justice; (iv) The possibility of the Accused's likelihood to repeat similar or ot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... handling water, sewer, electricity, power connections, and other services related to the property, paying lease payments and other dues, making additions or modifications to the existing structure with required permissions, renting out the land, issuing receipts, and managing tenant-related matters. Furthermore, the Appellants granted authority for selling, disposing, or transferring the land, entering into agreements, and receiving consideration on behalf of the principal. However, regardless of obtaining all the rights over the Subject Land, Respondent No. 2 does not appear to have ever informed the Revenue/local authorities that he had purportedly 'purchased' the Subject Land through a GPA. The ownership of the land always remained in the name of the Appellants in the revenue record and no application for change of mutation, etc. was moved by the 2nd Respondent. We are informed that at a very belated stage, after the execution of the alleged 1996 GPA, a portion of the Subject Land was acquired by the Government and compensation in this regard was paid to the Appellants. Respondent No. 2 neither objected to the payment of such compensation nor asserted his title over the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ious of the fact that Respondent No. 2 is said to have applied for the certified copy of the 1996 GPA in February, 2022 after a period of 26 years since its execution. It is also unclear why, given that when the Subject Land is situated in Gurugram District, the GPA in relation to the property was registered in Kalkaji, New Delhi. It raises some suspicion regarding the genuineness of the GPA. There is, thus, overwhelming and clear cut prima facie evidence to indicate that the version of events provided by Respondent No. 2, the buyers of the property, and the Sub Registrar, should be viewed with scepticism. These parties, prima facie, appear to be acting in concert with each other and might be hands in glove, with the ulterior motive of duping the absentee land-owners. This angle requires thorough consideration by the investigating authorities. The Appellants have seemingly fallen prey to a well-orchestrated conspiracy hatched to rob them of their highly valuable property. In such cases where the victims of a crime, on account of their old age and geographical distance, are unable to secure justice on their own, it falls upon Courts and the State to carry out their solemn duty to wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, the pendency of these cases does not estop the issues of forgery and fabrication being considered in the course of criminal investigation. The facts of the case speak for themselves and an element of criminality cannot be ruled out at this stage. Whether or not the alleged offences were committed by Respondent No. 2 and his co-Accused in active collusion with each other can be effectively determined by a free, fair, unhampered and dispassionate investigation. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, custodial interrogation of not only Respondent No. 2 but all other suspects is, therefore, imperative to unearth the truth. Joining the investigation with a protective umbrella provided by pre-arrest bail will render the exercise of eliciting the truth ineffective in such like case. We are, as mentioned, also skeptical, suspicious and incredulous about the verification process of the 1996 GPA carried out by the Sub-Registrar, Kalkaji, New Delhi. Hence, the conduct of the officials of Sub-Registrar Office, Kalkaji, New Delhi is also required to be examined to take the investigation to its logical conclusion. 29. It is clarified that the observations made hereinabove are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
