Chandigarh, Jan. 21 -- While the Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday set the developers of Ambience Mall in Gurugram free from criminal liability by setting aside a 2020 judgement of Punjab and Haryana high court, the apex court's judgment has also come as a breather for 58 real estate projects across Haryana where de-licensing of land was undertaken. Ordering a CBI investigation, the Punjab and Haryana high court had in July 2020 quashed the town and country planning department's October 18, 2001 and September 1, 2010 orders to de-license two chunks of land (eight acres and 3.9 acres) out of 18.98 acres approved for constructing Ambience Lagoon Island residential complex. The de-licensed land was then permitted by the department for raising a commercial complex, the Ambience Mall. De-licensing here meant that a part of the land for which a residential licence was issued was taken out of the purview of the residential licence. The HC judgement was challenged by the Haryana government as well as the developer, Ambience Developers and Infrastructure Private Limited represented by Raj Singh Gehlot before the SC. Before the state challenged the HC order, the state legislature also enacted a legislation to grant legitimacy to past actions of the town and country planning department, including de-licensing of land. The assembly in August 2020 passed the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas (Second Amendment and Validation) Bill. The amendment and validation bill came as a relief to the developers of the Ambience Mall besides similar cases involving de-licensing of land. The validation clause passed by the assembly said that notwithstanding any judgment, decree or order of any court or tribunal or any authority, any action taken or orders issued, things done or purporting to have been taken or done by the director, before the commencement of the HDRUA (Amendment and Validation) Act, 2020, will be deemed to be valid and effective as if such action, approval, orders were issued or action taken in accordance with its provisions. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the apex court that upon an enquiry pursuant to the HC judgment, it came to light that as many as 58 projects have been developed in a similar fashion pursuant to de-licensing undertaken in exercise of statutory powers. "If the impugned judgment is allowed to stand, all such projects, which were brought up long back, would be exposed to serious jeopardy,'' Mehta had told the SC. The SC on Tuesday said the CBI after an FIR had filed a report under Section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. "In the said report, the act of de-licencing of 8 acres of land has been found to be in accordance with law. However, the only illegality attributed to the appellants-developers pertains to the alleged misrepresentation in the Apartment Buyers' Agreement.", the SC bench said....