IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL  APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL  APPEAL NO.1251 OF 2008 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl) No.7834/2007)

    Naresh Gulia     ...Appellant Versus

    State of Delhi & Ors.   ...Respondents                

O  R  D  E  R

Despite service of notice, complainant has not appeared. Leave granted.

Appellant is the son of Captain Tej Pal Singh. Admittedly, the

complainant and the said Capt. Tej Pal Singh entered into an agreement on or about

31.12.1994  relating  to  construction  and  development  of  land  by  demolishing  the

existing  structure and constructing   a  multi  storeyed shopping  complex.  The  said

agreement fell through. A First Information Report No. 786 of 1995 was lodged, inter-

alia, contending that the said agreement had been entered into by and between Daljit

Kukreja and Capt. Tej Pal Singh and his son-Naresh Gulia.  

A bare perusal of the said agreement shows that the appellant is

not a party therein. He is not even a witness thereto.  

Apart from the contention that both Capt. Tej Pal Singh and his

son-Naresh Gulia were parties to the said  

agreement,no other allegation has been made. If there was a  

-1-

dis-honest intention on the part of the appellant, the same should have been alleged to

have been existing on the same day of the entering into the agreement. If he is not a

party to the agreement, the question of making any representation to the complainant

with dishonest intention would not arise.

We,  therefore,  are  of  the  opinion  that  the  First  Information

Report  as  also  the  charge-sheet  do  not  disclose  commission  of  an  offence  under

Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. Furthermore, a Civil  Suit has already been

settled  where  a  settlement  was  recorded.  It  is  contended  by  the  learned  counsel

appearing  on behalf  of  the  State  of  Delhi  that  the  said  settlement has  also  fallen

through. If that be so, the complainant may have other remedies. No case has been

made out to proceed against the appellant.  

Criminal proceedings as against the appellant  are quashed.

The appeal is allowed.

......................J.       [S.B. SINHA]

......................J.       [CYRIAC JOSEPH]

New Delhi, August 4, 2008.

-2-