How Non Resident Indians are involved in false cases to grab their property by illegal means

Many a times, Non-Resident Indians (NRI) put their trust in close friends and relatives who later deceive them. Such cases generally involve property disputes of some sort between the parties. If the party against Non-Resident Indians (NRI) feels that they do not have a good case and that if they go to court against the Non-Resident Indians (NRI), they will lose, such a party may involve Non-Resident Indians (NRI) in false fake criminal cases so that Non-Resident Indians (NRI) may be imprisoned or he becomes so much afraid that he runs away from India and never return back to claim his property in India. The ultimate purpose of such a person working against Non-Resident Indians (NRI) is to grab the property of Non-Resident Indians (NRI) through illegal means, money power and political approach.

In one of the cases, a foreign national who is a citizen of USA had a property deal with Indian nationals. Both the parties knew each other for several years and had full trust in each other. However with the passage of time, the party in India became greedy and thought of grabbing the entire property of the foreign national through illegal means by registering a false First Information Report in the police against the foreign national. The problem arose because the foreign national had an agreement to sell with the Indian party. They did not got the property transferred and registered immediately although foreign nationals had taken possession. This is a completely wrong approach. A foreign national should immediately try to get the property in his ownership and not mere possession. The person who is trustworthy at one time may get greedy at the other.

The foreign nationals who were under threat by police in India were able to protect themselves by approaching the High Court. A copy of the contents of their petition is as following – (names are withheld for client privacy)

Petition under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code for protection of life and liberty of the petitioners who are foreign nationals from illegal and unlawful police action and for directing the official respondents (police) that they should not register a false and fake First Information Report (FIR) against the petitioners on behest of private respondents because of their political influence since the case in dispute is purely a case of civil nature and the police is trying to rope in the entire family for political revenge;
Official respondents (police) may be directed to disclose contents of the complaint made by private respondents to the police
To transfer the investigation in the matter to any place Punjab;
If the First Information Report (FIR) has already been registered against the petitioners, the official respondents (police) should give a notice to the petitioners before arresting them;
Any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.


1. That the petitioners are citizens of India and is therefore entitled to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to protect their life and liberty from the unlawful and unreasonable actions of the official respondents on behest of private respondents. Petitioners are relatives of each other and are foreign nationals, citizens of USA, of Indian origin settled in USA for last 20 years.

2. That the official respondents number (police) are being influenced politically by private respondents who are a family.

3. The facts of the present case are that in the past, the family of the respondents were in good relations with the family of the petitioners. Private respondents approached petitioners and asked for help since they were in financial difficulty. They proposed to sell their properties (hereinafter called disputed properties) to petitioners. Petitioners agreed to this and the parties promised to enter into agreement to sell or sale agreement at a future date. Since the parties were having good relations with each other, petitioners requested respondents to mortgage the disputed properties in the SBI in which the family businesses of the petitioners had CC limits. Respondents went to the bank and mortgaged their property and signed all the relevant documents in relation to the disputed property being used as mortgage for OD / CC limits of the businesses of the petitioners.

4. That in respect to the disputed property, two agreements to sell were signed. The first agreement to sell was signed between respondents as sellers and petitioners as purchasers. The second agreement to sell was signed between respondents as sellers and petitioners as purchasers. It is clearly mentioned in the said agreements to sell that the disputed properties are already Security in the SBI bank. It is also mentioned that on the date of agreement, the purchasers have made full payment of the sale amount to the sellers and also that the sellers have taken physical possession of the sale properties.

5. That however, when the purchasers asked the sellers to enter into a sale agreement on the basis of the agreement to sell in which the entire payment had already been made the sellers, the sellers refused to do so. Because of this the purchasers were forced to send legal notices via speed post to the sellers. On the said date mentioned in the legal notices, the purchasers were present before the SDM. Even after this, the present petitioners tried to peacefully resolve the matter between themselves and private respondents.

6. That since the private respondents/ sellers were not executing their part of contract as mentioned in two different agreements to sell, the purchasers filed two different suits for specific performance.

7. That after refusing to transfer the disputed properties to the petitioner, the private respondents, who are a family, had a meeting with senior political leaders in Punjab to discuss the matter with them and to hatch a conspiracy to implicate the present petitioners who are foreign nationals in a criminal case. It may be noted that the respondents are known criminals and have several criminal cases pending against them. Under a planned conspiracy, respondents made 2 different complaints to the police against the petitioners to the police. In the said complaints, allegations have been made against the petitioners that petitioners got several blank papers signed from the respondents and purchased the said property at a lower value. The petitioners got the disputed properties mortgaged with SBI bank and made Over Draw Limits from the bank. It is submitted that on the face of it, it is clear that the dispute is of civil nature and remedy which lies with private respondents is of civil nature, not criminal.

8. That although the private respondents have a civil remedy which they have not availed, the private respondents made a complaint to the police against the present petitioners and the police called and threatened the petitioners several times that in case they do not immediately come to the police station, they will be put behind bars. The police have come to the premises of the petitioners several times at odd hours without complying with the mandatory provision of section 160, CrPC. The petitioners have not received any notice in writing from the police requiring their attendance before the police on a specific date and time. The police came to the premises of the petitioners and firstly told whoever was at home that the petitioners should submit their statement. However after that, the police officials have repeatedly visited the houses of the petitioners and have threatened that strict action will be taken against the petitioner if they do not submit their statements immidiately.

9. That now the petitioners have received threats from the private respondents as well as information from the police that the entire family will be involved in false criminal cases to wipe out the business of the family and to harm their life and liberty. Further, police is forcing petitioners to make statement without disclosing contents of the complaint made by private respondents to the police.

10. That the petitioners requested the police for a copy of the complaints made against them. The police have bluntly refused to give a copy of the complaint made against the petitioner by the private respondents.

11. That because of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case the petitioner is our under imminent and immediate threat that they will be involved in false and frivolous criminal cases on behalf of private respondents with the help of their political friends. It is because of the circumstances that petitioners are pleading for the kind indulgence of this Hon’ble Court so that their life and liberty may be protected.

12. That the petitioners have not been involved in any First Information Report or any criminal case in the past and have a clean record. The petitioners are law-abiding foreign nationals and citizens of USA and a full faith and respect of law and further undertake not to indulge in any sort of criminal activity at all. The petitioners further undertake to abide by any condition imposed by this Hon’ble Court in the interest of Justice.