BHARAT SHER SINGH KALSIA versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR.

BHARAT SHER SINGH KALSIA versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR.

The Supreme Court held that insofar as the appellant (vendee) is concerned there was no role in the execution of the PoA nor any misdeed by the PoA-holder; Clauses 3 and 11 of the PoA, read harmoniously with Clause 15, authorized the PoA-holder to execute sale deeds, receive consideration and get registration; the sale deed in question was executed and registered at Dehradun for land in Dehradun and a prior civil suit in Dehradun rejecting cancellation of the sale deed favored the vendee; therefore, quashing of the FIR and the order taking cognizance dated 18.11.2014 was warranted insofar as they related to the appellant to protect against unwarranted criminal prosecution.

Parties
Appellant: Bharat Sher Singh Kalsia; Respondent: State of Bihar & Anr.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
31 January 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal No. 523 of 2024 / Judgment on Appeal by the Supreme Court (final Disposal)
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Quashing of FIR, Power of Attorney, Sale Deed, Territorial Jurisdiction, Construction of Deed or Contract
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Property Law Contract Law Quashing of FIR Power of Attorney Sale Deed Territorial Jurisdiction +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bharat Sher Singh Kalsia

Appellant

State of Bihar & Anr.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal No. 523 of 2024 / Judgment on Appeal by the Supreme Court (final Disposal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the FIR and cognizance under Sections 409, 467, 468, 471 and 420 IPC against the vendee should be quashed where the vendee had no role in execution of the PoA or any misdeed by the PoA-holder
  2. 2 Whether clauses of the Power of Attorney (Clauses 3, 11 and 15) can be harmoniously construed to authorize the PoA-holder to sell, receive consideration and present for registration
  3. 3 Whether the trial court at Buxar had territorial jurisdiction to try offences in relation to a sale deed executed and registered in Dehradun for land situated in Dehradun

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that insofar as the appellant (vendee) is concerned there was no role in the execution of the PoA nor any misdeed by the PoA-holder; Clauses 3 and 11 of the PoA, read harmoniously with Clause 15, authorized the PoA-holder to execute sale deeds, receive consideration and get registration; the sale deed in question was executed and registered at Dehradun for land in Dehradun and a prior civil suit in Dehradun rejecting cancellation of the sale deed favored the vendee; therefore, quashing of the FIR and the order taking cognizance dated 18.11.2014 was warranted insofar as they related to the appellant to protect against unwarranted criminal prosecution.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Impugned Judgment dated 12.03.2021 of the High Court of Judicature at Patna set aside
  • FIR No.87 of 2011 dated 19.03.2011 registered at Dumraon Police Station, Buxar, Bihar quashed insofar as it relates to the appellant