Final Order 6

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL JUDGE (PC ACT) (ACB)-02,
ROUSE AVENUE DISTRICT COURTS, NEW DELHI
CNR No.: DLCT11-000556-2026
CLOR No. 07/2026
State vs. Closure Report (Premson)
FIR No. 18/2025
P.S. Anti Corruption Branch
u/s 13(1)(d)/13(2) P.C. Act r/w
Sec. 120-B IPC
24.09.2026
Order on Closure Report
1. This order shall decide the Closure Report filed by the
Investigating Officer (IO) Insp. Yashwant Singh of the Anti-Corruption Branch
(ACB), Delhi.
Brief facts:
2. It is averred in the final report that a complaint was received from
Sh. M.S. Vats, SDM (HQ-I/OIC (Vig.) vide Ref. No. F.
14(31)/07/Div.Com/Vig./HQ/ND/1563 dated 26.09.2007 against Sh. Premson,
the then Sub-Registrar, INA, regarding rampant corruption and violation of
laws and regulations. It is alleged in the final report that Sh. Premson, the then
Sub-Registrar, INA, has not complied with the provisions of law as he had not
fulfilled the statutory obligations of examining the instrument presented before
him and has allowed the evasion of stamp duty thereby causing loss of revenue
to the government in a manner contrary to the statutory obligations cast upon
him as registering authority. He did not comply with the administrative
instructions issued from time to time by the Inspector General of Registration
and he had also allowed GPA to be registered whereas the instrument should
CLOR No. 07/26 in FIR No. 18/25 State vs. Closure Report (Premson)
	Page 1 of 16
-- 1 of 16 --
have been registered as Sale Deed and allowed the private parties to evade
payment of stamp duty and thus caused loss of revenue to the Government
Exchequer. Contents of the complaint filed by Sh. M.S. Vats, SM (HQ-I)/OIC
(Vig.) are as follows:
“The above said official, Shri Premson, was
posted as Sub-Registrar (INA) from 05.10.2006 till
20.08.2007. During his tenure as Sub-Registrar he
was to follow the provisions of Indian Stamp Act
and its amendment Acts and Indian Registration
Act, 1908 and various administrative instructions
issued by the competent authority.
The Department had received complaint
from Aggarwal Bandhu Associate at 7, Vikash
Sadan Shopping Complex, Near INA, New Delhi-
23, regarding rampant corruption and violation of
laws and regulation at the office of SR VII, New
Delhi.
The complainant Sh. Jawant Rai Aggarwal,
Advocate has pointed out details of violations. On
receipt of the complaint, realizing the gravity of the
complaint SDM-1-HQ/OIC (Vig) was directed to
form a team of officials from Revenue Headquarters
and examine the veracity of the complaints. Sh.
M.S. Vats along with Sh. Gulab Singh & Shri
Aswini both Naib Tehsildar in Registration Branch
went to the SR-VII office at INA and seized 17
(seventeen) documents from the office of SR-VII.
The documents attached with the complaint have
been tabulated at Annexure ‘A’. The documents
seized by SDM-I (HQ) have been tabulated at
Annexure ‘B’. The following irregularities have
been noticed prima-facie in the above said
documents.
(i) Registration of instruments in contravention to
the governing provisions of law/administrative
instructions by not examining the content and
purpose of the instruments.
(ii) Registration of property situated outside his
jurisdiction.
CLOR No. 07/26 in FIR No. 18/25 State vs. Closure Report (Premson)
	Page 2 of 16
-- 2 of 16 --
Instruments were not referred to Collector of
Stamps for determination of market value of
consideration, thereby allowing payment of
deficient stamp duty to the Government exchequer.
As the Office of Sub Registrar has been
established under an Act of Parliament its
incumbents discharge quasi judicial functions and
have to apply the provision of the law relevant to
the discharge of their functions. Shri Premson has
not complied with the provisions of law as specified
above as he has not fulfilled the statutory
obligations of examining the instrument presented
before him and has allowed the evasion of Stamp
Duty thereby causing loss of revenue to the
government in a manner contrary to the statutory
obligations cast upon him as registering authority by
the law. He therefore allowed the government to be
defrauded of its lawful revenue by means of
collusion with private and interested parties for
ulterior motives aiming for personal benefits. He
further did not comply with the administrative
instructions issued from time to time by the
Inspector General of Registration. Further, he had
allowed agreement to sale to be registered whereas
the instrument should have been registered as sale
deed and allowed the private party to evade
payment of stamp duty and thus caused loss of
revenue to the government exchequer by not
realizing the full stamp duty.
In view of the above I am directed to request
you to register a case against the above said official
and investigate the matter further and take further
necessary action to meet the ends of justice.”
3. Thereafter, a case FIR No. 04/2008 u/s 13 (1) (d)/13 (2) PC Act
r/w 120-B IPC was registered at P.S. ACB, GNCT of Delhi on 14.02.2008
(endorsement for case registration was made by Inspector Nand Kumar.).
Further investigation was carried out by him and subsequent Investigating
Officers.
CLOR No. 07/26 in FIR No. 18/25 State vs. Closure Report (Premson)
	Page 3 of 16
-- 3 of 16 --
4. After completion of investigation, the required prosecution
sanction order in terms of section 19 of PC Act against accused Sh. Premson,
SR-VII (INA) was obtained from the competent authority and chargesheet
dated 09.02.2022 was filed before Hon’ble Court of Spl. Judge, (PC Act),
ACB-02, Rouse Avenue Courts presided over by Sh. Dig Vinay Singh by
Inspector Parveen Kumar Saroha.
5. During the stage of consideration of chargesheet, the court
observed some discrepancy in investigation and vide order dated 07.03.2022,
returned the case file with directions to further investigate the matter on certain
points regarding examination of property holders.
6. During the course of further investigation, the parties involved in
registration of alleged General Power of Attorneys (GPAs) were examined.
Thereafter, fresh chargesheet was filed by Insp. Krishan Kumar in the court of
Special Judge (PC Act) (ACB)-02, Rouse Avenue Courts Complex, New Delhi
presided over by Sh. Ashish Aggarwal. During the stage of further
consideration of chargesheet, the court observed further discrepancies in
investigation and vide order dated 07.11.2024 directed further investigation of
the case and directed to register separate FIRs for offences which are not jointly
triable. The order dated 07.11.2024 is as follows:
“1. IO submits that he was handed over the
investigation at a belated stage when the damage had
already been done.
2. By order dated 06.08.2024, certain queries were
raised by the Court. On 13.09.2024, the IO was not able to
respond to the queries. Ld. Public Prosecutor agreed that
there have been flaws in investigation.
3. As per charge-sheet, the accused Sub-Registrar was
found to be registering documents of properties which were
beyond his jurisdiction. This Court has noted that numerous
offences have been committed over different points of time.
CLOR No. 07/26 in FIR No. 18/25 State vs. Closure Report (Premson)
	Page 4 of 16
-- 4 of 16 --
Inspite of this, and in negation of the duty cast by Section
154 of CrPC, independent FIRs have not been registered for
the said offences. In order to ward off scrutiny of the Court
and accountability for the investigation done in each
individual case, and to make the case unwieldy and to
create roadblocks in the trial of accused person, all offences
were bundled into a common FIR. Not only this, the
persons who got the documents registered illegally were not
arrayed as accused persons and were not proceeded against.
These are the persons who allegedly sponsored/abetted the
crime and benefited from it. However, they were let off.
4. Ld. Public Prosecutor submits that at page no.12 of
the charge-sheet at point no.15, it is mentioned that the
person who purportedly executed the GPA had actually not
even executed the document. Ld. Public Prosecutor submits
that this is a clear case of forgery that may have taken place
with the assistance of the Sub-Registrar and inspite of this,
neither the Sub-Registrar nor the persons who committed
the forgery have been arrested or even proceeded against.
He also submits that sale of properties was carried out by
documents titled as “GPA” and stamp duty was not
collected by the Sub-Registrar while registering the
documents.
5. Ld. Public Prosecutor submits that the case is fit for
further investigation because many facts have come out
during the statements of persons recorded by the
investigating officer and several deficiencies are existing in
the investigation that has been carried out so far. Ld. Public
Prosecutor also submits that the persons who may have
given bribe need to be subjected to sustained interrogation
in order to ascertain the source of money paid as bribe, the
manner in which it was paid and the purpose which was
being fulfilled by getting the said documents registered. He
also submits that efforts need to be made to recover the
sums paid as bribe.
6. It is strange that all these aspects have not been
looked into inspite of the Anti-Corruption Branch sitting
over the investigation for sixteen long years. It is therefore
directed that further investigation be carried out.
7. Let affirmative steps towards the investigation,
including registration of fresh FIRs for offences which are
distinct and not jointly triable, be taken by the investigating
officer within one month from today. The investigating
officer shall submit status report of the investigation before
this Court on the next date.
CLOR No. 07/26 in FIR No. 18/25 State vs. Closure Report (Premson)
	Page 5 of 16
-- 5 of 16 --
8. I also find it appropriate that the investigation is
assigned to an investigating officer who can exclusively or
substantially devote his time to this case since sixteen years
have already passed. Let investigation be assigned to any
such investigating officer by the Joint Commissioner of
Anti-Corruption Branch. In this behalf, reference is made to
the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of
Sudhir Bhaskarrao Tambe v Hemant Yashwant Dhage Crl.
Appeal No.766/2010 decided on 12.04.2010 where it was
held that this Court can direct change of investigating
officer.
9. It is made clear that the investigation will be
monitored by this Court since the officers of Anti-
Corruption Branch have failed to supervise it, due to which
there are gaping holes left unaddressed.
10. Copy of this order be sent to the Joint
Commissioner of Anti-Corruption Branch.
11. Renotify on 05.12.2024.”
7. It is averred in the final report that in compliance of the above said
order, a proposal in terms of Section 17A of PC Act was sent to the Competent
Authority vide No. 996/RC-04/08/DKS/ACP/ACB dated 24.01.2025, for
obtaining necessary permission for registration of 25 separate cases and
conducting further investigation against Sh. Premson, the then SR-VVI, INA
(now retired), Revenue Department, GNCT of Delhi. Thereafter, the
permission of the competent authority issued vide F. No.
17A/01/DOV/2025/3116 dated 28.03.2025 in terms of section 17A of PC Act,
1988 as amended in 2018, for registration of 25 separate FIRs for individual
transactions against Sh. Premson, the then SR-VII, INA, Revenue Department,
GNCT of Delhi was obtained.
8. On receipt of sanction, the endorsement for registration was made
by ACP Devendra Kumar Singh and the present case was registered on
12.04.2025 vide FIR No. 18/2025, u/s 13 (1) (d)/13 (2) PC Act r/w 120B IPC at
CLOR No. 07/26 in FIR No. 18/25 State vs. Closure Report (Premson)
	Page 6 of 16
-- 6 of 16 --
P.S.Anti Corruption Branch, GNCT of Delhi and investigation was handed
over to ACP Devendra Kumar Singh. However, later considering the
superannuation of ACP Devendra Kumar Singh on 31.01.2026, further
investigation of the present case and 24 other cases arising in compliance of
order dated 07.11.2024, was handed over to Insp. Yashwant Singh on
15.01.2026.
9. During the course of investigation, Sh. Sameer Garg, S/o Sh. M.C.
Gupta R/o C-72, Prem Kutir Apartment, Sector-9, Rohini, Delhi-110085 (Mob.
No.9810517145, aged 56 years was called through notice and
examined/interrogated in the presence of panch witness, Sh. Rajeev Kumar Jha.
During his examination, he stated that he was never involved in sale/purchase
of property situated at Village Kailon, Hadbast No. 193, Tehsil & Distt. S.A.S.
Nagar (Mohali) through registration of an instrument of GPA. The aforesaid
GPA was executed by Sh. Amit Gupta, S/o Sh. Jagdish Ram Gupta, R/o D-15,
Delhi-110009 in his favour wherein he was authorised to execute the sale deed
of the aforesaid property. On the basis of the aforesaid GPA, a sale deed was
executed between Sh. Amit Gupta and others and M/s Ansal Properties and
Infrastructures Limited in respect of total land parcel of 19 Kanal 13 Marla
(2.355 Acres approx.) out of which 3 Kanal 5.5 Marla was owned by Sh. Amit
Gupta. Sh. Amit Gupta and others had executed a development agreement with
M/s Ansal Properties and Infrastructures Limited vide which land was
surrendered by the owners in return of which they obtained 977.40 Sq.
Yds./Acre of developed plotted area in addition to total consideration amount
of Rs.2 Lakh. Sh. Sameer Garg also stated during his examination that he was
working as Deputy Manager at M/s Ansal Properties and Infrastructures
Limited, 115, Ansal Bhawan, 16 K.G. Marg, New Delhi-110001 during the
relevant period. He further averred that the aforesaid property was sold to
CLOR No. 07/26 in FIR No. 18/25 State vs. Closure Report (Premson)
	Page 7 of 16
-- 7 of 16 --
M/s Ansal Properties and Infrastructures Limited vide Sale Deed No.1847,
dated 05.10.2007 at the office of Sub-Registrar/Mohali (Punjab) towards sale
consideration of Rs.2 Lakh whereas stamp duty was paid at the rate
Rs.4,91,300/- for registration of the Sale Deed. He further revealed that neither
Sub-Registrar-VII/Delhi nor any other official of his office or any
broker/document writer demanded or accepted bribe money in lieu of
registration of the aforesaid property as an instrument of GPA. He further
clarified that he had not paid any amount of money as bribe to any official of
Sub-Registrar-VII office for registration of the aforeaid property. His
interrogation report is as under:
“Q.1. You have seen photocopy of the aforesaid GPA
placed on record. Whether you have been engaged in
sale/purchase of aforesaid property through an instrument
of GPA or otherwise.
Ans. I was never involved in sale/purchase of property
situated at Village Kailon, Hadbast No. 193, Tehsil & Distt.
S. A. S. Nagar (Mohali) through registration of an
instrument of GPA. The aforesaid GPA was executed by
Sh. Amit Gupta S/o Sh. Jagdish Ram Gupta R/o D-15,
Delhi-110009 in my favour wherein I was authorised to
execute the Sale Deed of aforesaid property. It is worth
mentioning here that I was working as Deputy Manager at
M/s Ansal Properties and Infrastructures Limited, 115,
Ansal Bhawan, 16 K.G. Marg, New Delhi-110001 during
the relevant period.
Q.2. Please provide the complete address of Sh. Amit
Gupta and his contact details.
Ans. I do not have any information regarding his current
whereabouts.
Q.3. What is the present status of aforesaid property?
Ans. The aforesaid property was sold to M/s Ansal
Properties and Infrastructures Limited vide Sale Deed No.
1847, dated 05.10.2007 at the office of
Sub-Registrar/Mohali (Punjab) towards sale consideration
of Rs. 02 Lakh whereas stamp duty was paid at the rate
Rs.4,91,300/-.
CLOR No. 07/26 in FIR No. 18/25 State vs. Closure Report (Premson)
	Page 8 of 16
-- 8 of 16 --
Q.4. It is evident from the document that the price of the
property as per circle rate is Rs. 98,25,000/- whereas it has
been purchased far below the circle rate i.e. Rs. 2 Lakh.
Please clarify.
Ans. On basis of the aforesaid GPA, a sale deed was
executed between Sh. Amit Gupta and others and M/s
Ansal Properties and Infrastructures Limited in respect of
total land parcel of 19 Kanal 13 Marla (2.355 Acres
approx.) out of which 3 Kanal 5.5 Marla was owned by Sh.
Amit Gupta. Sh. Amit Gupta and other had executed a
development agreement with M/s Ansal Properties and
Infrastructures Limited vide which land has been
surrendered by the owners in return of which they have
obtained in 977.40 Sq. Yds./Acre of developed plotted area
in addition to total consideration amount of Rs. 02 Lakh.
Q.5. Please provide the certified copy of GPA in respect of
aforesaid property.
Ans. I have provided you the self-certified copy of
aforesaid instrument of GPA dated 02.08.2007 and Sale
Deed dated 05.10.2007 alongwith copy of development
agreement 28.04.2005 with regard to aforesaid property.
Q.6. Name, address and contact details of the broker, if any
be provided with respect to registration of aforesaid GPA.
Ans. Since I was an employee of M/s Ansal Properties and
Infrastructures Limited, therefore, no broker was involved
in registration of aforesaid GPA.
Q.7. Whether you visited the office of
Sub-Registrar-II/Delhi on 02.08.2007 for registration of
aforesaid GPA?
Ans. No, I did not visit the office of
Sub-Registrar-VII/Delhi on 02.08.2007 for registration of
aforesaid GPA as the same was executed by Sh. Amit
Gupta, being the first party.
Q.8. What was the mode of making payments in lieu of
purchase of aforesaid property?
Ans. The sale/purchase of aforesaid property was not
effected through an instrument of GPA at any point of time.
However, the said property was sold vide Sale Deed No.
1847, dated 05.10.2007 at the office of
Sub-Registrar/Mohali (Punjab) having jurisdiction over
aforesaid prperty. The payment towards sale consideration
was paid by M/s Ansal Properties and Infrastructures
CLOR No. 07/26 in FIR No. 18/25 State vs. Closure Report (Premson)
	Page 9 of 16
-- 9 of 16 --
Limited to the respective stakeholders in cash paid in
advance.
Q.9. Whether Sub-Registrar-VII/Delhi or any other
official at office of Sub-Registrar-VII/Delhi or any
broker/document writer have demanded or accepted bribe
money in lieu of registration of aforesaid property or
otherwise?
Ans. Neither Sub-Registrar-VII/Delhi nor any other
official of his office or any broker/document writer have
demanded or accepted bribe money in lieu of registration of
aforesaid property. It is further clarified that I have not
paid any amount of money as bribe to any official of Sub-
Registrar-VII office for registration of aforesaid property
and the aforesaid GPA was executed by Sh. Amit Gupta,
being a first party.
Q.10. Any other details you want to share with the
investigation agency related to this case.
Ans. I have submitted my written reply along with
documents as mentioned in Q.5.”
10. During further investigation, it came out that Sh. Amit Kumar
Gupta, the executant of aforesaid GPA had expired on 04.09.2022. Death
certificate of late Amit Kumar Gupta was obtained and verified from the
Sub-Registrar (Birth & Death) Karol Bagh Zone, MCD on 01.04.2026.
11. During further investigation, the instrument of General Power of
Attorney (GPA) registered vide Registration No. 2036 dated 02.08.2007 at the
office of Sub Registrar VII in respect of land measuring 03 Kanal 05-Marla
comprising of Khewat/Khatoni No. 62/72, 182/208, Khasra No. 12/13/2(0-
5)13/3(5-16), 14(8-0), 18/1(4-9), 18/2(1-1), 1818/3(2-10), 8/1(3-7), 8/2(4-13),
13/1()1-19, 15 (7-8), pieces 10 area 39 Kanal 8 Marlas its 1/12 Share means 03
Kanal 51/2 Marlas situated at Village Kailon, Hadbast No. 193, Tehsil & Distt.
S.A.S. Nagar (Mohali) was examined. On examination of aforesaid GPA, it
was found that there was no sale or purchase by way of this GPA. No
consideration amount was involved. However, certain powers have been
CLOR No. 07/26 in FIR No. 18/25 State vs. Closure Report (Premson)
	Page 10 of 16
-- 10 of 16 --
transferred by Late Amit Gupta to Sh. Sameer Garg by way of aforesaid GPA
which are as under:-
 “To manage, control, supervise the above said property under his own
signature and to proceed thereto whatsoever the case may be.
 To deal with all the concerned departments/authority whatsoever the case may
be and get the construction/addition or alteration done after getting the
necessary approvals.
 To apply and get the sale permission from the concerned
Authority/Department and therafter execute the Sale Deed/Agreement/
Attorney before the Sub-Registrar in favour of intending purchasers.
 To apply and get the house tax, water and electric connections from the
concerned authority to deposit security amount and get it back when it may be
required and to make payment by way of dues and demands and to get receipt
thereof and to file objection if any and to proceed thereto whatsoever the case
may be.
 To let my property whole or any part to any persons/institution, to realize the
rent and to issue rent receipts to the tenant/s including eviction of properties
and any legal matter and any matter dealing with State or Government bodies.
 To execute, sign and present all kinds of suits, complaints, appeals, revision,
agreement, written statements, affidavits, etc. in proper court and office to
proceed in all the proceeding/s to compromise cases, to engage advocate and
to file the suit/s.
 To further appoint any other person(s) as my attorney authorising to do all
above acts.
CLOR No. 07/26 in FIR No. 18/25 State vs. Closure Report (Premson)
	Page 11 of 16
-- 11 of 16 --
 To do all acts, deeds and things in addition to that and hence such acts, so done
by him should be considered as done by me, as i could do the same personally
if I was present.”
Report of the IO:
12. The IO has mentioned the legal aspects as follows:
Legal Aspect I: Sub section (a) of Section 33 of the Registration Act reads as
“if the principal at the time of executing the power of attorney resides in any
part of India in which this Act is for the time being in force, a power of
attorney executed before and authenticated by the Registrar or Sub-Registrar
within whose district or sub-district the principal resides.
Legal Aspect II: In view of Sub section 1 (a) of Section 33 of Registration Act,
1908, minutes of the meeting heldon 13.06.2005 under chairmanship of
Divisional Commissioner (Revenue), GNCT of Delhi and subsequent
clarification issued by Revenue department on 12.11.2014; Hon’ble Delhi High
Court in case titled Harmohini Sarna and Others vs. Govt. Of NCT of Delhi;
has allowed registration of GPA as per provisions of Registration Act, 1908.
Legal Aspect III: Perusal of Minutes of the meeting dated 13.06.2005 chaired
by Divisional Commissioner (Revenue), GNCT of Delhi read with point no. 10
of Circular dated 12.11.2014 issued by Inspector General of Registration,
Department of Revenue, GNCT of Delhi and other relevant orders with regard
to registration of properties by way of an instrument of GPA; did not reveal any
violation on part of alleged Sub-Registrar or on part of parties involved in
registration of aforesaid GPA.
CLOR No. 07/26 in FIR No. 18/25 State vs. Closure Report (Premson)
	Page 12 of 16
-- 12 of 16 --
Closure Report:
13. On completion of investigation, the IO observed that :
a. No transfer or sale or purchase of immovable property has been affected
by way of alleged registration of an instrument of GPA registered vide
Registration No. 2036 dated 02.08.2007 at the office of Sub-Registrar VII in
respect of land measuring 03 Kanal 05-Marla comprising of Khewat/Khatoni
No. 62/72, 182/208, Khasra No. 12/13/2(0-5)13/3(5-16), 14(8-0), 18/1(4-9),
18/2(1-1), 1818/3(2-10), 8/1(3-7), 8/2(4-13), 13/1()1-19, 15 (7-8), pieces 10
area 39 Kanal 8 Marlas its 1/12 Share means 03 Kanal 51/2 Marlas situated at
Village Kailon, Hadbast No. 193, Tehsil & Distt. S.A.S. Nagar (Mohali).
b. Nil consideration amount involved in registration of aforesaid GPA.
Therefore, question of loss to government exchequer does not arise.
c. Vide aforesaid GPA, the executant (Late Sh. Amit Gupta) gave certain
powers (as mentioned in forgoing paras) to Sh. Sameer Garg.
d. The aforesaid GPA has been registered in terms of Sub Section 1 (a) of
Section 33 of Registration Act, 1908.
e. No violation of internal orders/circulars/minutes of the meeting on
record has been found.
f. Careful reading of relevant internal orders/circulars/minutes of the
meeting of Revenue Department, subsequent clarification dated 12.11.2014 and
Hon’ble Delhi High Court’s interpretation of these orders/circulars/minutes of
the meeting reveal that the aforesaid instrument of GPA was registered within
the legal framework.
g. There are no allegations of demand or acceptance of bribe by accused
Sub-Registrar.
CLOR No. 07/26 in FIR No. 18/25 State vs. Closure Report (Premson)
	Page 13 of 16
-- 13 of 16 --
h. The Sale Deed of the aforesaid property was executed at the office of
jurisdictional Sub-Registrar/Mohali.
Stand of the Complainant:
14. On 31.08.2026, Mr. Bhaskar Priyadarshi, Sub-Registrar, INA had
appeared on behalf of complainant department and stated that he has no
objection if the closure report filed by the IO is accepted.
Examination and Analysis:
15. Heard submissions on the Closure Report and perused the record.
16. I have meticulously perused the final report (closure report) and
the key documents annexed thereto. It was alleged by the complainant that
Sh. Premson, Sub-Registrar, INA was taking illegal gratification and was
registering properties in collusion with the parties on the basis of general power
of attorney thus, allowing them to evade stamp duty and consequently, causing
loss to the government exchequer. It is also alleged that he was registering the
properties situated outside his jurisdiction
17. However, investigation has revealed that GPA was executed
before Sub-Registrar-VII, INA for the purpose of granting power to
Mr. Sameer Garg, to do all the dealings with respect to property situated at
Village Kailon, Hadbast No. 193, Tehsil & Distt. S.A.S. Nagar (Mohali).
Further, the GPA was executed by Sh. Amit Kumar Gupta in his favour
authorising him to execute the sale deed of the aforesaid property. The
investigation has also revealed that on the basis of the said GPA, a sale deed
was executed between Sh. Amit Kumar Gupta and others and M/s Ansal
Properties and Infrastructures Limited in respect of total land parcel of 19
Kanal 13 Marla (2.355 Acres approx.) out of which 3 Kanal 5.5 Marla was
CLOR No. 07/26 in FIR No. 18/25 State vs. Closure Report (Premson)
	Page 14 of 16
-- 14 of 16 --
owned by Sh. Amit Gupta. Sh. Amit Gupta and others had executed a
development agreement with M/s Ansal Properties and Infrastructures Limited
vide which land was surrendered by the owners in return of which they
obtained 977.40 Sq. Yds./Acre of developed plotted area in addition to total
consideration amount of Rs.2 Lakh. The aforesaid property was sold to M/s
Ansal Properties and Infrastructures Limited vide Sale Deed No.1847 dated
05.10.2007 at the office of Sub-Registrar/Mohali (Punjab) towards sale
consideration of Rs.2 Lakh whereas stamp duty was paid at the rate
Rs.4,91,300/- for registration of the Sale Deed. The investigation also revealed
that Mr. Amit Kumar Gupta has expired, however, Mr. Sameer Garg has made
it clear that no bribe was ever given to any government official or the
Sub-Registrar.
18. Therefore, from the inquiry and the investigation, it appears that
there is no reason to believe that accused Premson obtained illegal gratification
for registering the GPA for sale of property or with respect to property outside
his jurisdiction.
19. Most importantly, Mr. Bhaskar Priyadarshi, Sub-Registrar, INA
on behalf of the complainant department appeared before this court on
31.08.2026 and submitted that the Department has no objection if the closure
report is accepted. His statement in this regard was also recorded. Therefore,
considering the evidence collected by the IO, the documents placed on record,
the statements of the witnesses as well as taking into account that the
Complainant Department did not object to the closure report, this court is of the
view that sufficient material is not available against the accused to prosecute
him under section 13(1)(d)/13(2) P.C. Act r/w Sec. 120-B IPC.
CLOR No. 07/26 in FIR No. 18/25 State vs. Closure Report (Premson)
	Page 15 of 16
-- 15 of 16 --
Decision:
20. In view of the above, the Closure Report is hereby accepted. The
bail bond and surety bond, if any, stands discharged. Original documents, if
any, shall be returned to the surety after cancellation of endorsement, if any.
File be consigned to the Record Room after due compliance.
Announced in the open court today
on this 24th day of September, 2026.
(Dr. Ruchi Aggarwal Asrani)
Special Judge (PC Act)(ACB)-02
Rouse Avenue District Courts, New Delhi.
CLOR No. 07/26 in FIR No. 18/25 State vs. Closure Report (Premson)
	Page 16 of 16
-- 16 of 16 --