9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 1103X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... chasing and identifying the plot prima facie suggests that from the very beginning of transaction, the petitioner had a dishonest intention of deception and false inducement on the basis of which money was collected.
Conclusion - The allegations of fraudulent intent and misappropriation of funds in real estate transactions can constitute criminal offences, even if they arise from contractual relationships. Multiple FIRs can be justified when each pertains to a separate transaction.
There are no reason to quash the FIRs instituted against the petitioner. As a result, the instant writ petition is dismissed on contest. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 3 on 30th of April, 2018. The completion date for the said project was mentioned on 31st of December, 2019. However, the RERA did not register the said project for a further period of 8 months and it was only on 17th of December, 2018 that the said project came to be registered. Due to non- registration of the project, no construction/development work could be undertaken by the company/Agrani Homes over the said project. Accordingly, the company applied for extension of the date of completion of the project on 13th of March, 2020 and the completion date was fixed on 31st of March, 2021. Again the petitioner's company made an application with RERA to extend the completion date on 5th of August, 2020 but it was denied. In the meantime, some intending purchasers/allottees of flats in blocks G, H, I, K and L filed complaints before RERA which was registered as Complaint Case No. CC/306/2019 along with other analogous cases. During the pendency of those cases, the company assured RERA that the proceeds of the sale of flats would be utilised towards amount who wish to take the refund of the amount paid by them. During the pendency of the said complaint cases, RERA directed the inten ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs/complaints are designed in a way to criminalize the civil dispute between the petitioner and the home buyers/complainants. It is a fact that the petitioner is involved in real estate business, agreements were made with the intending purchasers that the petitioner would construct residential flat/apartments/hospital/commercial place/markets etc., and collect a booking money from the intending purchasers. However, the petitioner never had any intention to misappropriate or commit cheating in respect of the said money collected by him. Initially, petitioner did not obtain permission from RERA for construction. Subsequently, considerable numbers of flats were constructed and those were handed over to the intending purchasers. The petitioner wants to settle the dispute with the intending purchasers either by delivery of flats or by payment of money with interest. As he is in custody, it is not possible for him to negotiate with the intending purchasers. Therefore, the subsequent act and conduct of the petitioner clearly shows that he had no intention to misappropriate any money or commit cheating by inducing the intending purchaser to part with their property& ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 19 and 21 of the Constitution and the expansive power of the police to investigate a cognizable offence has to be struck by the court. There cannot be any controversy that sub-section (8) of Section 173 CrPC empowers the police to make further investigation, obtain further evidence (both oral and documentary) and forward a further report or reports to the Magistrate. In Narang case [(1979) 2 SCC 322: 1979 SCC (Cri) 479] it was, however, observed that it would be appropriate to conduct further investigation with the permission of the court. However, the sweeping power of investigation does not warrant subjecting a citizen each time to fresh investigation by the police in respect of the same incident, giving rise to one or more cognizable offences, consequent upon filing of successive FIRs whether before or after filing the final report under Section 173(2) CrPC. It would clearly be beyond the purview of Sections 154 and 156 CrPC, nay, a case of abuse of the statutory power of investigation in a given case. In our view a case of fresh investigation based on the second or successive FIRs, not being a counter-case, filed in connection with the same or connected cognizable offence alleg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner. Upon receipt of such direction, the S.P., Economic Office Unit, Bihar, Patna, directed all S.Ps in all police districts in the State of Bihar to submit report with respect to the criminal cases instituted against Agrani Group of Companies. On the basis of such requisition, the S.S.P., Gaya informed that Rampur P.S. Case No. 139 of 2022 is pending for investigation against the petitioner within the jurisdiction of Gaya District and as many as 44 criminal cases are pending within the jurisdiction of Patna Police District. The investigation of those cases were taken up by the Economic Offence Unit. 21. The Assistant Director, ED, Zonal Office at Patna filed a counter affidavit on 5th of January, 2024, stating, inter alia that investigation of scheduled offences under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the IPC suggested that M/s Agrani Homes Real Marketing Pvt. Ltd. had illegally diverted the deposits/investment made by the home buyers and purchased property in his personal name at Patliputra Colony, Patna and thereby diverted money obtained by the petitioner as proceeds of crime. Based on the material and information available with the respondent department, searches were ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in the instant writ petition. Observation of this Court in Paragraph No. 4 onwards, i.e., 4 to 22 of the order dated 22nd of April, 2024 is relevant and quoted below: "4. In order to appreciate the above- mentioned applications and submissions made by the learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioner, it is necessary to narrate the following facts: - The petitioner has filed the above- numbered writ petition praying for quashing of multiple F.I.R.s filed against him on the ground that if the submissions made in the F.I.R., instituted against the petitioner, are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, they do not prima facie constitute any offence under Sections 420/ 467 / 468 / 471 of the Indian Penal Code. It is, however, admitted on behalf of the petitioner that allegations made out by the Informants in several complaints made, constitute an offence under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code only. It is stated by the petitioner that he is the Managing Director of Agrani Homes Private Limited and Agrani Homes Real Marketing Private Limited. They undertook various development projects in the field of infrastructure and Housing development in the Districts of Pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the I.P.C. without there being clear case of inducement. The difference between criminal breach of trust and cheating would depend upon the fraudulent inducement and mens rea. To support the charge of criminal breach of trust and cheating, existence of fraudulent or dishonest intention right at the beginning of transaction with mens rea must be shown. Breach of contractual obligations which are accompanied by fraudulent, dishonest or deceptive inducements, resulting in involuntary and inefficient transfer stands criminalized under Section 415 of the Indian Penal Code. 8. It is submitted by the learned Sr. Counsel on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner had no such fraudulent, dishonest or deceptive intention to induce the intending purchasers to pay consideration price for the flats to be constructed from the very beginning. Practically, the petitioner's company constructed approximately 1150 flats and duly handed over the possession of 850 flats to the allottees. Unfortunately, the project could not be completed for various reasons as Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA), Bihar did not grant approval for the projects within the statutor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rom different persons, not in respect of one or two projects, but he almost, at the same time, demonstrated that he was going to construct as many as hundreds of projects. 13. It is submitted by Mr. V.N.P. Sinha, learned Sr. Counsel on behalf of the Economic Offence Unit (EOU) that the petitioner's application under Article 226 of the Constitution for quashing of F.I.R. is not fit to be entertained on the ground that on the earlier occasion, the petitioner moved as many as 10 writ petitions in this Court for identical reliefs. The said applications were either dismissed or withdrawn or allowed to be dismissed for default or remained unattended. Thus, it is contended on behalf of the EOU that when the petitioner is not entitled to get main relief for quashing of the F.I.R., he cannot pray for interim relief by filing applications, which is not connected with the main relief. In support of his contention, he draws my attention to the prayer made by the petitioner in the instant writ petition, which is as follows: "The instant writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner seeking quashing of multiple F.I.R.s on merits where the allegations made in the First Information Reports or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntioned case, a Co-ordinate Bench of Kerala High Court refers to another decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Anubhav Mittal & Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors., reported in (2022 LiveLaw (SC) 980). The Hon'ble Supreme Court found in Anubhav Mittal that offence of cheating, forgery and fabrication of valuable documents had occurred at different places of the country and each victim having a right to prosecute his complaint through the law enforcement agency. Therefore, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the accused cannot demand conduct of investigation only with respect to a particular offence. It was observed that the accused, who had mobilised offence from different parts of the country could not plead his inconvenience of having to defend the case in multiple jurisdictions. 18. In Narinderjit Singh Sahni v. Union of India, reported in (2002) 2 SCC 210, it is held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that: "As regards the issue of a single- offence, we are afraid that the fact situation of the matters under consideration would not permit to lend any credence to such a submission. Each individual deposit agreement shall have to be treated as separate and indi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... further while referring to page 26 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Respondent No. 5, shows the number of fake companies constituted by the petitioner. Therefore, it is submitted by the learned Advocate for the Enforcement Directorate that the petitioner is not entitled to bail in connection with a case instituted under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). In support of his contention, he refers to a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 929. 22. In reply, it is submitted by the learned Sr. Counsel on behalf of the petitioner that Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code is predicate offence under PMLA. He refers to his previous argument to contend that allegation under Section 420 of the I.P.C. is not applicable against the petitioner. Therefore, RCIR referred to by the Enforcement Directorate does not have any reason to be registered." 26. Section 406 of the IPC is the penal provision over criminal breach of trust. Criminal breach of trust is defined in Section 405 of the IPC. The provision runs thus:- "405. Criminal breach of trust.-Whoever, being ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
