Parminder Singh vs State of Punjab and another

Sabina, J.—By way of this petition filed u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner has sought quashing of FIR No.265 dated 15.6.1999 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (''IPC'' for short), registered at Police Station Civil Lines Ludhiana and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the housing loan was taken by Satnam Singh and Jagjit Singh from the Life Insurance Corporation Housing Finance Limited (the LIC for short). Petitioner had signed the agreement to sell as a witness on the basis of which loan was taken by Satnam Singh and Jagjit Singh. In this regard, learned counsel has placed reliance on the certificate issued by the LIC on 10.9.2009 (Annexure P-2).

Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has opposed the petition and has submitted that forged documents were produced by Satnam Singh and Jagjit Singh at the time of taking loan from the LIC.

None has appeared on behalf of respondent No.2.

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel, I am of the opinion that the present petition deserves to be allowed.

Prosecution story, in brief, is that Satnam Singh and Jagjit Singh moved an application for housing loan to the tune of Rs. 5,00,000/-for purchase of a house worth Rs. 8,50,000/-. In the application submitted by Satnam Singh and Jagjit Singh, it was averred that they were running business of manufacturing cycle parts. Loan application was received by the LIC on 14.6.1996. Alongwith the application, one agreement to sell dated 20.5.1996 was also attached. Believing the case of the applicants as correct, the loan of Rs. 5,00,000/-was advanced to Satnam Singh and Jagjit Singh. The loan was disbursed to the loanees vide cheque dated 10.8.1996. The loanees deposited the instalments up to October, 1998 but, thereafter, failed to deposit the loan instalments. On inquiry, it transpired that the house in question was occupied by Mala Srivastav and she disclosed that she has purchased the property from Satnam Singh and Jagjit Singh vide registered sale deed dated 29.7.1998. Guarantor Inderjit Singh took up the plea that he had not executed any guarantee. It also transpired that no firm in the name of M/s Ambica Cycles/ Industries was in existence. Satnam Singh and Jagjit Singh, in connivance with Baljinder Singh, had cheated the corporation.

In the present case, petitioner is not named in the FIR. Petitioner had signed the agreement to sell produced by the loanees at the time of applying for loan as a witness. The loan amount was disbursed to Satnam Singh and Jagjit Singh. A perusal of the certificate issued by the LIC (Annexure P-2) reveals that the entire loan amount has been received by the LIC. The said certificate was issued in favour of Satnam Singh. It has been stated in the certificate that the LIC has received full and final payment from the party and had settled the account. Now nothing remained due towards the party. Issuance of the certificate (Annexure P-2) has been admitted by respondent No.2 in its reply. Since the loan amount in question has already been cleared by the loanees, continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioner, who had signed the agreement to sell relied upon by the loanees as a witness, would not serve any useful purpose. No wrongful loss has been caused to any party as the amount in question has already been paid by the loanees. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. FIR No.265 dated 15.6.1999 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC, registered at Police Station Civil Lines Ludhiana and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, qua the petitioner, are quashed.