The Punjab and Haryana High Court has issued a landmark ruling, cautioning against using criminal proceedings to resolve civil disputes in property transactions. A single bench of Justice H.S. Grewal quashed an FIR alleging cheating and forgery. The court held that the FIR was filed to evade civil liability, constituting a misuse of criminal process.
Case Background
The dispute originated from a land deal in Sonipat. Complainant Ajay Kumar alleged that on August 29, 2018, he entered a sale agreement for approximately 56 kanals and 3 marlas of land with Parveen Nain and others at ₹1.25 crore per acre. According to the complaint, on March 7, 2019, the accused sought time for balance payment, leading to three separate agreements. One agreement (No. 13668) was allegedly tampered with by changing the sale price to ₹25 lakh per acre through page substitution. Ajay claimed the accused filed a specific performance suit using this forged document to pressure him for registry at the lower price. An FIR was registered under IPC Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468, and 471.
FutureCrime Summit 2026: Registrations to Open Soon for India’s Biggest Cybercrime Conference
Petitioners’ Counsel Arguments
Senior advocate R.S. Rai represented the petitioners. He argued it was a pure civil dispute arising from the sale agreement, with the complainant having sold the land to a third party. The FIR was lodged solely to avoid civil liability and counter the petitioners’ specific performance suit. Rai emphasized that criminal proceedings cannot be wielded as a tool to settle civil disputes.
Complainant’s Counsel Arguments
Senior counsel Kanwaljeet Singh, for the complainant, countered that clear forgery occurred. Civil and criminal proceedings can run parallel, and an FIR cannot be quashed merely because a civil suit is pending where a prima facie case exists.
Court’s Key Observations
The court meticulously examined the agreement documents. Justice Grewal noted it was a registered document with no cuttings, overwritings, or alterations visible. The ₹25 lakh per acre figure was clearly stated in words and figures. Crucially, the complainant sold the same land to M/s Celestial Valley LLP on May 7, 2021, at ₹35 lakh per acre, undermining the ₹1.25 crore claim’s credibility. The petitioners had appeared before the sub-registrar on the registry date with affidavits and photos, but the complainant failed to show up. These facts indicated the complainant breached the agreement and filed the FIR to escape civil liability.
Reliance on Supreme Court Precedents
The court invoked State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, outlining grounds for quashing criminal proceedings. In Indian Oil Corporation v. NEPC India Ltd., the Supreme Court warned against the rising trend of criminalizing civil disputes. In the recent Shailesh Kumar Singh v. State of UP (2025), it reiterated that criminal law cannot be invoked for money recovery or civil settlements. The court concluded the forgery allegations were improbable and unsubstantiated. The FIR was a ploy to settle civil scores and abuse process. Thus, the FIR and all consequent proceedings were quashed.
About the author – Ayesha Aayat is a law student and contributor covering cybercrime, online frauds, and digital safety concerns. Her writing aims to raise awareness about evolving cyber threats and legal responses.
