The Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that every breach of trust does not amount to a criminal offence, while quashing a cheating FIR arising out of a property transaction in Amritsar. Among other things, Justice HS Grewal ruled that the complainant had attempted to give “a criminal colour to a civil dispute”.
Allowing the petition filed through counsel RS Bajaj and Sachin Kalia, Justice Grewal observed that the dispute essentially stemmed from an agreement to sell and execution of sale deeds, making it predominantly contractual and civil in nature.
“This court is of the considered view that every act breach of trust may not constitute penal offence of criminal breach of trust. The breach of trust involves civil wrong in respect of which a person may seek his remedy for damages in Civil Court,” the High Court held.
Referring to the facts of the case, Justice Grewal observed the dispute between the parties, at its core, was contractual in nature. However, the complainant got the FIR registered after a delay of more than one and a half years. It appeared that the complainant attempted to give a criminal colour to a civil dispute.
The Bench added that criminal proceedings could not be used as a mechanism for coercion in disputes that were essentially civil disputes. “It is well settled that where the dispute is predominantly civil in nature, criminal proceedings cannot be permitted to be used as a tool for coercion or harassment. In the present case, the complainant has also failed to avail the appropriate civil remedies available under the law,” the Court observed.
Justice Grewal further ruled that continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of law. “Therefore, the case in hand deserves to be allowed. Moreover, it is a settled principle of law that the High Court is entitled to quash proceedings if it is of the opinion that continuation proceedings thereof would amount to an abuse of the process of law,” the order said.
In its concluding directions, Justice Grewal ordered: “The present petition is allowed and impugned the FIR dated May 21, .2015, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Amritsar, under Section 420 of te IPC as well as all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed.”
Bajaj, during the course of hearing, had earlier told the court that the petitioners entered into an agreement to sell dated May 15, 2013 with the complainants regarding the first floor of a flat in Amritsar for sale consideration of Rs 26 lakh. An amount of Rs 3.50 lakh was allegedly paid as earnest money and the sale deed was to be executed by July 1, 2013, after handing over possession.
The complainants alleged that the petitioners repeatedly delayed handing over possession on the pretext that they had no alternative accommodation and later executed the sale deed in favour of some other persons, leading to registration of the FIR under Section 420 IPC.
