Mange Ram vs State of Haryana and Another

A.S. Nehra, J.—Mange Ram has filed this petition u/s 482 Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the FIR 531 dated December 27, 1990, under Sections 10/7/75 of the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975, (hereinafter called the Act), which was registered at the instance of District Town Planner, Hissar respondent No. 2.

The allegations mentioned in the FIR are as under:-

"From DTP HSR to S. P. HSR memo No. 1822 DTP (E) Dt. 26-11-90 Sub:- Infrigement of the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Area Act, 1975 - lodging of FIR. It is brought to your notice that M/s. Bharat Property Dealer near Bus Stand, Hissar Phone No. 2906 has advertised in Parva at 9-11-90 for sale of Residential/Industrial/ Plot in New Auto Market Colony, Sirsa Road, Hissar without obtaining a licence from the Director Town Planner Haryana as required u/s 3 of the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act 1975. The photo of the unauthorised colony is attached herewith. He has thus contravened the Section 7(i) of the said Act. This act on the part of M/s. Bharat Property Dealer, near Bus Stand Hissar, constituted an offence punishable u/s 10 of the Harayana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975. The place of occurrence falls in the jurisdiction of the Police Station Sadar, Hissar. The offence committed as mentioned above may please be got investigated and FIR registered. The sanction of law of the District Magistrate, Hissar may please be obtained before putting the challan in the Court as required u/s 11 of the said Act."

The petitioner has alleged in para 4 of the petition that he is neither owner, shareholder or proprietor and he has no relationship directly or indirectly with any colony, therefore, question of infringement of Section 3 of the Act does not arise and no offence u/s 7 of the Act is made out against the petitioner.

The advertisement which appeared in the newspaper "Parva" daily dated 9th November, 1990 reads as under:-

"Contact for purchase and sale of shops and plots in New Auto Market Sirsa Road Hissar.

Bharat Property Dealer, Hissar Phone No. 2906."

Notice of this petition was given to the respondents and reply on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2 has been filed by the Superintendent of Police, Hissar. Superintendent of Police, Hissar has stated in para 2 of his reply that it is specifically denied being incorrect that no offence is made out as per allegations contained in the FIR. It has further been mentioned in para 4 of the reply that the case of the petitioner falls u/s 7(i) of the Act and, therefore, petitioner is liable to be tried u/s 10 of the Act.

Mr. B. S. Chahar, Advocate, for the petitioner has referred to the definition of "Colony" and Section 7 of the Act which reads as under:

Colony

"Colony" means an area of land divided or proposed to be divided into plots for residential, commercial or industrial purposes but an area of land divided or proposed to be divided :- i) for the purpose of agriculture,

or

ii) as a result of family partition, inheritance, succession or partition of joint holding not with the motive or earning profit; or

iii) in furtherance of any scheme sanctioned under any other law; or

iv) by the owner of a factory for setting up a housing colony for the labourers or the employees working in the factory; provided there is no profit motive; or

v) when it does not exceed one thousand square metres, shall not be a colony."

Section 7 of the Act

"Save as provided in Section 9, no person shall -

i) without obtaining a licence u/s 3 transfer or agree to transfer in any manner plots in a colony or make an advertisement or receive any amount in respect thereof;

ii) erect or re-erect any building in any colony in respect of which a licence u/s 3 has not been granted.

iii) erect or re-erect any building other than for purposes of agriculture on the land subdivided for agriculture as defined in clause (aa) of Section 2 of this Act."

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has not made any advertisement for selling plots in a colony, therefore, no offence u/s 7 of the Act is made out against the petitioner. The petitioner is neither owner, shareholder or a proprietor of the said market. He does not own any plot in the New Market and he has not constructed or erected any building or boundry wall in the said market,

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I hold that the petitioner does not own any land as owner, share holder or proprietor in the Auto Market, Sirsa Road, Hissar and there is no colony in existence in Auto Market, Sirsa Road, Hissar and the petitioner has not made any advertisement qua any plot in a colony which is in existence in New Auto Market. The petitioner has only advertised that Bharat Property Dealer be contacted for purchase and sale of shops and plots in New Auto Market. Petitioner is a property dealer, therefore, he is within his rights to advertise in the Newspaper that he may be contacted for purchase and sale of plots in Auto Market. The petitioner has not violated the provisions of Section 7 of the Act. Therefore, this is a fit case in which the FIR lodged by the District Town Planner, Hissar is liable to be quashed.

In view of the above discussion, FIR No. 531 dated 27th December, 1990 is quashed and proceedings pending against the petitioner in the Court in view of the challan presented by the prosecution are ordered to be dropped. District Town Planner. Hissar respondent No. 2 has abused the process of the Court by filing a false and frivolous complaint against the petitioner. A copy of this order be sent to the Director, Town and Country Planning, Haryana, Chandigarh, for taking disciplinary action against the District Town Planner, Hissar, for filing a false and frivolous complaint against the petitioner.