Gujarat High Court
Laljibhai Pababhai Chavada vs State Of Gujarat on 19 March, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17784/2018 CAV ORDER DATED: 19/03/2025
undefined
Reserved On : 21/02/2025
Pronounced On : 19/03/2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 17784 of 2018
With
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 18322 of 2018
==========================================================
LALJIBHAI PABABHAI CHAVADA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
========================================================== Appearance:
MR SK PATEL(654) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MR ROHAN RAVAL APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI COMMON CAV ORDER
1. By way of this petitions filed u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioners have prayed for quashment of the FIR being I - C.R. No. 59 of 2018 registered with Babara Police Station, Rajkot Rural for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of the IPC.
2. Brief facts of the case are as under:-
2.1. It the is case of the complainant that 11 accused persons shown in the FIR have committed an offence as alleged in the FIR, by way of criminal conspiracy for mutating the name of one Bachu Bhavan in the revenue record village form no: 7/12 of land survey no: 194/75 which is Government vest land at Page 1 of 24 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Wed Mar 19 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 19 23:29:24 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17784/2018 CAV ORDER DATED: 19/03/2025 undefined village: Gad-kotadi, Ta: Babara, Dist: Amreli, and thereby, they have forged revenue. record, and it is further alleged that the succession revenue entry no: 2126 dated 27/04/14 was mutated in the revenue record and the same was certified bringing legal heirs of Bachu Bhavan on record.
3. Learned advocate Mr. SK Patel seeking quashment of FIR qua petitioners would submit that the petitioners were Circle Inspector and Mamlatdar in e-dhara at the relevant point of time. They are not named in the FIR. He would further submit that allegation of making forged revenue entries in Village Form No.7 and 12 has been levelled against the petitioners for land survey no: 194/75 which is Government vest land at village:
Gad-kotadi, Ta: Babara, Dist: Amreli (in short "the subject land"), however, the present petitioners have followed their official duty as per guidelines issued in accordance with various circulars issued by the State of Gujarat and mutated revenue entry on the basis of last revenue entry available in name of Bachu Bhavan. He would further submit that name of deceased Bachu Bhavan was already mutated in village form Nos.7 and 12 of the subject land in the year 2004, as per GR dated 7.8.2004, only the computerized revenue records in village form Nos.7 and 12 and 8A would be considered as authentic revenue records for speedy, effective and transparent proceedings. He would further submit that in the case on hand, both the petitioners have followed their duty and have mutated names of legal heirs of the deceased Bachu Bhavan, whose name was already appearing in the revenue records and thereby, the petitioners have not committed any offence of forgery by fabricating forged documents / revenue entries as alleged in the FIR.Page 2 of 24 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Wed Mar 19 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 19 23:29:24 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17784/2018 CAV ORDER DATED: 19/03/2025 undefined 3.1. Learned advocate Mr. Patel referring to the SIT report dated 17.7.2017 (Annexure F) would submit that even in the SIT report, nowhere, the names of the petitioners are appearing nor it is stated that the present petitioners are involved in making false revenue entries of fabricated and forged sale deeds to grab the government traverse land. Referring to the circular of the State of Gujarat dated 23.5.2014 (Annexure E), he would further submit that pursuant to the order passed by this Court in Special Civil Application No.2282 of 2011, whereby, it is observed that "Police shall not enter into the disputes pertaining to revenue entries. Even on the basis of alleged entry, if sale deed is entered into civil remedies are to be undertaken for setting aside such sale deed. " The immunity has been provided to the revenue officers from being prosecuted for mutating entries following the provisions of law. Therefore, he would submit that the present petitioners' name have not been alleged or mentioned either in SIT report or in FIR, nor they have played any active or passive role in alleged commission of the offence, by allowing the petitions, the petitioners, who are protected since 20.9.2018, immunity to them from prosecuted be extended.
3.2. Learned advocate Mr. Patel referred to section 125P of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1979, to submit that no legal proceedings shall lie against the State Government or any officer in respect of anything which is in good faith done or intended to be done by or under this Code. Therefore, he would submit that since the provisions of law has provided immunity to the petitioners from being prosecuted for just making mutation entries in the revenue records of the land, the petitioners may not be put to trial for frivolous and vexatious allegations.
Page 3 of 24 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Wed Mar 19 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 19 23:29:24 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17784/2018 CAV ORDER DATED: 19/03/2025 undefined 3.3. While summing up his arguments, learned advocate Mr. S.K.Patel referred to the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Mahmood Ali and others Vs. State of UP and others, 2023 LiveLaw SC 613 and submitted that the Court should exercise inherent powers u/s 482 of the Code or extraordinary jurisdiction u/s 226 of the Constitution of India to get the FIR or the criminal proceedings quashed essentially on the ground that such proceedings are manifestly frivolous and vexatious or instituted with the ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance. He would further submit that looking to the facts of the case where the present petitioners have done nothing except following their duty as per the provision of Land Revenue Code as well as various circulars issued by State Government and mutated the entries of legal heirs of deceased Bachu Bhavan, mutation entry of whom was already existed in village form Nos.7 and 12, in such fact situation, the Court owes duty to look into the FIR with little more closely and may quash it.
3.4. Upon above submissions, he prays to allow this petition by quashing and setting aside the impugned FIR.
4. Per contra, learned APP Mr. Rohan Raval would submit that it is a classic case, whereby falsifying in fabricating the document and making forgery in the revenue records and by preparing false revenue records, subject government traverse land has been allowed to be grabbed by the petitioners. He would further submit that the petitioners taking advantage or rather disadvantage of the computerized system of the revenue records in the State of Gujarat, prepared one forged and fabricated Page 4 of 24 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Wed Mar 19 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 19 23:29:24 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17784/2018 CAV ORDER DATED: 19/03/2025 undefined manual village form Nos.7 and 12 to mutate name of deceased Bachu Bhavan showing of the year 2004-2005. Whereas, deceased Bachu Bhavan has admittedly died on 5.12.1991. He would further submit that this particular village form Nos.7 and 12 was prepared manually, where all the revenue records are computerized. He would submit that manually village form no.7 and 12 was prepared; without mentioning name of the deceased Bachu Bhavan in village form No.6.
4.1. Taking this Court through the charge sheet papers, learned APP would submit that since the entry No.161 was mutated for the subject land in the revenue records, subject land continued to be shown in possession of the State Government. It was shown to be the land belongs to the State Government even in 2004-2005, but forged village form Nos.7 and 12 was manually prepared to show name of deceased Bachu Bhavan possessing the subject land in the year 2004-2005 without having any entry in village form no.6 recording any transaction recognized by Transfer of Property Act and immediately thereafter, an application was moved by the legal heirs of the deceased Bachu Bhavan to mutate their names in place of deceased Bachu Bhavan. This application was entertained by the petitioners and without verifying that whether name of deceased Bachu Bhavan is mutated in village form No.6 or not, forthwith, mutated names of legal heirs of deceased Bachu Bhavan who died in the year 1991, in the revenue records of the subject land and thereby, the petitioners have facilitated legal heirs of the deceased Bachu Bhavan to grab the government traverse land. He would further submit that not only the petitioners permitted other accused to facilitate to grab the government land, but tropical location has Page 5 of 24 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Wed Mar 19 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 19 23:29:24 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17784/2018 CAV ORDER DATED: 19/03/2025 undefined been allowed to be changed in the subject land, which is situated in waterbed of the river but on paper shifted to different area which enable the accused to mine the land. So, looking to the entire aspect which is coming from the facts of the case, learned APP would submit that allegation of forgery and creating fabricated documents are prima facie made out against the petitioners. He would further submit that the petitioners are supposed to be guardian of the revenue records. The entire revenue records, which are expected to be lying safe in the hands of the petitioners, have rather facilitated and simplified other accused to grab the government land for carrying out mining operation thereon by forging revenue records.
4.2. Learned APP would further submit that by following the circular of the State Government dated 23.5.2014 (Annexure E), the SIT consisting of Collector, Amreli, DDO, Amreli, S.P., Amreli, RAC, Amreli and Deputy Collectors, Amreli, Savarkundla, Dhari, Lathi convened a meeting on 17.7.2017 and discussed various issues placed before them, amongst those issue, the issue of subject land was also discussed and it was believed that village form Nos.7 and 12 had been manually prepared and except said manual village form, no other village forms are available in name of the deceased Bachu Bhavan qua subject land. Therefore, it is believed by the SIT that name of the deceased Bachu Bhavan was purposefully and wrongly mutated in the subject land and upon such report, the complainant being Mamlatdar was authorized to file complaint against all the erring persons including officers involved in grabbing the government traverse land.
Page 6 of 24 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Wed Mar 19 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 19 23:29:24 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17784/2018 CAV ORDER DATED: 19/03/2025 undefined 4.3. Referring to Annexure A, learned APP would submit that Mr. NK Khimani is authorized to lodge FIR against the accused. Referring to the FIR, he would submit that though names of the petitioners are not specifically mentioned in the FIR, it is stated that whoever in charge of the revenue records at the relevant time could also be the accused. He would further submit that in Criminal Misc. Application No.691 of 2018 pending before the learned Sessions Court, Amreli filed by one of the co-accused Mr. Chetan, the investigating officer filed affidavit, whereby role of the present petitioners is elaborately stated. Learned APP would further submit that therefore, prima facie case is made out against the petitioners and therefore, the petitions may not be entertained and may be dismissed.
4.4. Upon above submissions, learned APP prays to dismiss the petitions.
5. I have heard learned advocates for both the parties and also perused the contents of the FIR minutely so also gone through various papers annexed with the petition being part of the charge sheet.
6. In the affidavit filed by the investigating officer in a bail application filed by Mr. Chetan, who is one of the accused, the investigating officer, upon investigation of the offence, stated the role of the petitioners as under:-
"In the year - 2014, the accused nos. 2 to 7 were knowing that the said land has not been legally given to their father. Hence, after 15 years of the death of their father, the accused nos. 2 to 7 as well as the applicant of this case - Mr. C.G. Kaila - Talati-cum-Mantri (Village Page 7 of 24 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Wed Mar 19 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 19 23:29:24 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17784/2018 CAV ORDER DATED: 19/03/2025 undefined Clerk) have hatched a conspiracy in collusion with each other to usurp the government land by illegally adding their names in form nos. 7 & 12. The accused nos. 2 to
7 of this case have produced the Death Certificate of their father Babu Bhavan and have submitted an application to make an entry to add their heirship right. For which they have produced the copies of form nos. 7 & 12, pedigree, heirship list and an Affidavit for making heirship entry. Hence they have applied with the aforementioned proofs.
On the basis of the said application, the Deputy Executive Magistrate - Mr. G.J. Rokad of E-Dhara has also made a false heirship entry in the valuable government lands, despite the fact that the name of Bachu Bhavan was not there in the village form no. 6 as well as without considering the provision for verification of the legal rights of the transferor (the giver) and transferee (the taker) as per Sub-Sections 1-B)-(1) of Section 135-D of the Gujarat Land Ceiling Act. Also the Deputy Ex. Magistrate - Mr. L.P. Chavda - Circle Officer, Babra - have not carried out the verification as per the provision of sub section (6) of Section 135-D of Gujarat Land Revenue Act and have certified the said heirship entry.
Hence, both the Dep.Ex.Magi. have made the false entry no. 2126 dtd. 04/06/2014 in the Record of Rights and have entered the names of the accused nos. 2 to 7 in the record as heirs and thereby, both the officers have committed the breach of trust against the government with an intention to give illegal benefit to the remaining co-accused."
7. It is undisputed that when the names of legal heirs of the deceased Bachu Bhavan is mutated in the revenue records of the subject land, the present petitioners were in charge of e-dhara. An application for mutating names of the legal heirs in the subject land has been moved before the Mamlatdar, e-dhara and pursuant to which, names of the legal heirs of the deceased Bachu Bhavan have been mutated by the petitioners.
Page 8 of 24 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Wed Mar 19 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 19 23:29:24 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17784/2018 CAV ORDER DATED: 19/03/2025 undefined
8. It has been argued by learned advocate Mr. SK Patel that following the GR, the Mamlatdar and Circle Inspector, e-dhara was required to see that whose name exist in village form Nos.7 and 12 just preceding the proceedings of mutating the names of the legal heirs, since the petitioners have exactly followed the said proceeding, they have not done anything, which could be said to be forgery or fabrication of the documents, facilitate to grab the government traverse land. While arguing so, learned advocate Mr. Patel perhaps is under misconception about value of village form No.6 and village form Nos.7 and 12. It is Village form No.6 which is required to be seen while making the mutation entry, whereas village form Nos.7 and 12 just shows the name of a person, who is possessing the land. It does not relate to the title of the document. In charge of e-dhara therefore, always and mandantorily required to see that whose name is appearing in village form No.6 before making subsequent mutation entry. In the present case, what could be noticed that up to 2004-05, the name of the State Government was existed in village form No.6, Nos.7 and 12, but thereafter, village form Nos.7 and 12 in name of deceased Bachu Bhavan was manually prepared for the subject land. To be noticed that undisputedly, deceased Bachu Bhavan has expired in 1991, but still his name was mutated as a person in possession of the subject land as Khedut. Prima facie, this is a forged document.
9. In the year 2004-05, all revenue records were computerized. If we see the chargesheet papers, upto the year 2004-05, name of the State Government was mutated as a person in possession of the subject land. It has been suddenly Page 9 of 24 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Wed Mar 19 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 19 23:29:24 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17784/2018 CAV ORDER DATED: 19/03/2025 undefined changed to name of deceased Bachu Bhavan for the purpose of mining. Noticeably no transaction took place to change title of government traverse land to name of Bachu Bhavan. Even, no entry in village form no.6 was mutated to show name of Bachu Bhavan. To change entry in village form no.7 and 12, manual village form was prepared and taken base by petitioner to mutate another entry. This is fabricated documents and is prima facie revealed from charge sheet papers. A person, who expired in the year 1991 is surfaced as alive person having possession of subject land in year 2004-05, then manual certified copy of village form no.7 and 12 was issued by the Mamlatdar, Babara in this regard and thereafter, immediately, on 27.2.2014, an application was moved to mutate names of legal heirs of deceased Bachu Bhavan. Pursuant to such application, without verifying revenue entry No.161, which should have been verified, and without verifying the entry in village form No.6, the revenue entry was mutated solely relying upon the above forged village form Nos.7 and 12, which was never a part of the revenue records of land bearing survey No.194. Perhaps, the petitioners were fully aware of GR dated 7.8.2004 (Annexure B), where, it is stated that since 15.8.2004, only computerized extract of village form No.7&12 and 8A would be considered as authorized. Impression arise that petitioner having well aware of GR dated 15.08.2004, created false manual village form no.7 and 12 in the name of dead person, than took such village form no.7 and 12 as base and proceeded to mutate name of heirs of deceased Bhachu Bhavan again in village from no.7 and 12 without making any entry in village form no.6 with oblique and mala fide purpose to facilitate other accused in grabbing government traverse land.
Page 10 of 24 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Wed Mar 19 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 19 23:29:24 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17784/2018 CAV ORDER DATED: 19/03/2025 undefined
10. Learned advocate Mr. S.K.Patel has referred to Annexure B in his argument to submit that the petitioners are not required to go through village form No.6 while making mutation entry. I am failed to read such statement from Annexure B. In Annexure B, the GR of the State Government notified that the computerized extract of village form No.7&12 and 8A would be believed to be authorized since 15.8.2004.
11. In SIT report, following has been discussed for the questioned FIR.
"(7) As per the report submitted by the Deputy Collector, Lathi vide the letter dated 01/02/2017, on the land situated at Mauje Galkotadi Survey No. 203 of Taluka Babara, Champrajbhai Hathibhai has built a stable for cows and buffaloes. On being asked to produce the entitlement proofs of the same land, he has produced Form 7/12, 8-A and a copy of Sale Deed on 18/09/2015. On verifying the hand-written entitlement-documents pertaining to the land, it appeared that the present Khatedar Champrajbhai Hathibhai etc. and 2 others have purchased the land measuring He.Aa. 5-00-80 Sq.M. at Survey No. 1945.75 from Samjuben Bachubhai etc., the heirs of Khatedar Bachubhai Bhavanbhai, Khata No. 436, on sell-
purchase basis. Not any entry as to entitlement of the stated land is found. As per the Village Form No. 161, the land of Travers measuring Acre 1244-29 Guntha at Survey No. 194 and the pasture land measuring Acre 198-00 Guntha are shown qua a promulgation entry. Thereafter, a succession entry for the land at Survey No. 194 Paiki 75 came to be admitted, directly. As per which, due to death of Bachubhai Bhavanbhai, the names of Samjuben Bachubhai Talsania and 6 others came to be admitted. The land measuring Hec.Aare. 5- 00-80 Sq. Mtr. at Survey No. 194 Paiki 75 has been conveyed to Mer Munjaji Vejaji Odedara and Champrajbhai Hathibhai by Samjuben Bachubhai Page 11 of 24 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Wed Mar 19 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 19 23:29:24 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17784/2018 CAV ORDER DATED: 19/03/2025 undefined Talsaniya and 6 others vide the Sell Deed No. 902/2014 dated 02/09/2014. On examining non-computerized (manually drawn) Form 7/12 of the stated land, only one Form 7/12, pertaining to year 2004-05, is found and it shows name of Bachubhai Bhavanbhai, where nature of holding is shown as 'for stone-quarrying'. 5. The original Records in this regard have been recovered by the Mamlatdar.
On examining original records qua Village Form No. 6 of Mauje Gal Kotadi, there is no entry which would show whether the land in question, i.e. Survey No. 194 paiki 75, has been conveyed to Khatedar Bachubhai Bhavanbhai through succession or sell. Moreover, not any non-computerized Form 7/12, except the one pertaining to year 2004-05, for the land at Mauje Gal Kotadi has been drawn in favor of Bachubhai Bhavanbhai. Therefore, it appears that the then Talati- cum-Mantri has drawn non-bonafide manual (non- computerized) Form 7/12 in the year 2004/05 to make Bachubhai Bhavanbhai a Khatedar, wrongfully.
In view of the above mentioned reports and on perusal of the records, as per the discussion during the meeting, as it is clearly apparent that irregularities have been committed in a government land, the Mamlatdar, Babra has resolved to lodge a police complaint, immediately, against the then Talati-cum-Mantri, Gal Kotadi and the occupants who got their subsequent entitlements admitted in the stated land and cancel the questioned entry no. 2126 and 2145 in a revision. The issue stands dispose at SIT.
(Implementation - The Mamlatdar, Babara and Land Branch.)"
12. Pursuant to above discussion, Mamlatdar, Babara Mr. NK Khimani has been authorized to file FIR against all the relevant accused.
13. Learned advocate Mr. S.K.Patel would argue that name of Page 12 of 24 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Wed Mar 19 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 19 23:29:24 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17784/2018 CAV ORDER DATED: 19/03/2025 undefined the present petitioners are not mentioned in the FIR and therefore, they cannot be treated as persons, who have hatched conspiracy with other accused to commit the alleged offence. I am not impressed by such submission on the count that names of the present petitioners surfaced during the investigation as they were custodian of the revenue records at the relevant time, when alleged forged entries are made and pursuant to which, the government traverse land has been grabbed. Admittedly, petitioners wherein charge of revenue record, where it is alleged that forged and fabricated revenue entries was prepared. Complicity of petition attune of forgery is prma facie established. It appears to be systematically designed conspiracy hatched by all the accused to grab the land belonging to the government.
14. In Dharmendra Kumar Singh v/s. State of Jharkahnad [AIR 2024 (SC) 4499], Hon'ble Apex Court held and observed in para 15 to 18 as under :-
"15. This Court in a series of judgements has held that while exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, the High Court is not supposed to hold a mini trial. A profitable reference can be made to the judgment in the case of CBI vs Aryan Singh (2023 SCC Online SC 379 .
Relevant paragraph from the judgment is extracted here under:
"Para 10...As per the cardinal principle of law, at the stage of discharge and/or quashing of the criminal proceedings, while exercising the powers under Section 482 Cr. P.C., the Court is not required to conduct the mini trial.Page 13 of 24 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Wed Mar 19 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 19 23:29:24 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17784/2018 CAV ORDER DATED: 19/03/2025 undefined At the stage of discharge and/or while exercising the powers under Section 482 Cr. P.C., the Court has a very limited jurisdiction and is required to consider "whether any sufficient material is available to proceed further against the accused for which the accused is required to be tried or not".
16. In the instant case, the High Court has delved into an aspect which was absolutely not warranted and has exceeded its jurisdiction. The aspect about complicity of a person who was involved in the forgery is a disputed question of fact and the same will have to be addressed after a proper appreciation of evidence which can be done only during trial and not at such a nascent stage when summons is served. The Magistrate while considering the fact that the Respondent No. 2 -Santosh Kumar Choudha, was a beneficiary and after considering the scope of summons order had rightly observed that a prima facie case is made out and the same required an adjudication through a trial.
17. The High Court ought to have considered the complicity of the accused in case of forgery, which will have to be addressed after a proper appreciation of evidence and such appreciation of evidence can be done only by undertaking the initial process i.e. by conducting the trial on the aspect of forgery. The summons order was only at an initial stage and at such a nascent stage, the High Court ought not to have recorded the finding on the aspect of forgery.
18. At the cost of repetition, we state that admittedly respondents are the beneficiaries and merely because the appellant was an equal mischief player and/or a person having criminal antecedents at his credit by itself will not absolve respondents from the criminal liability as alleged against them. Least to say, "Two wrongs do not make a right."
15. Another argument canvassed by learned advocate Mr. Patel was that in view of section 125P of the Code, the petitioners are protected. Said provision reads as under:-
Page 14 of 24 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Wed Mar 19 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 19 23:29:24 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17784/2018 CAV ORDER DATED: 19/03/2025 undefined "125P. No suit or other legal proceedings shall lie against the State Government or any officer of the State Government in respect of anything which is in good faith done or intended to be done by or under this Chapter."
15.1 If anything has been done in good faith or intended to be done by the State Government or his officer under the Code, extend the immunity from being prosecuted. In the present case, as discussed herein above, the petitioners hand in glow with other accused have facilitated and simplified the process to grab the government traverse land. The revenue entries are mutated purposefully ignoring the entries in village form No.6.
The government land was ordered to be mutated in name of private person on the basis of one fabricated manual village form Nos.7 and 12, which has any existence when revenue entries are sought to be mutated in 2014, since in view of circular dated 7.8.2004, Annexure B, from 15.8.2004, computerized extract of village form No.6, 7, 12 and 8A were held to be authorized. But while mutating the names of the other accused in the subject land and facilitating them to grab the government traverse land, the present petitioners have relied upon fabricated manual village form Nos.7 and 12 and then in connivance with them, mutated the entry and also changed the topographic location of subject land from waterbed to mining area. All these issues are prima facie surfaced and required to be tested during trial. All these disputed issue cannot be decide without putting accused to trial.
16. In Rathish Babu Unnikrishnan vs. State Government of Page 15 of 24 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Wed Mar 19 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 19 23:29:24 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17784/2018 CAV ORDER DATED: 19/03/2025 undefined NCT at Delhi, 2023 Cr.LJ 311, the Hon'ble Apex Court after referring various judgments, in para 16 and 17 held as under:-
"16. The proposition of law as set out above makes it abundantly clear that the Court should be slow to grant the relief of quashing a complaint at a pre-trial stage, when the factual controversy is in the realm of possibility particularly because of the legal presumption, as in this matter. What is also of note is that the factual defence without having to adduce any evidence need to be of an unimpeachable quality, so as to altogether disprove the allegations made in the complaint.
17. The consequences of scuttling the criminal process at a pre-trial stage can be grave and irreparable. Quashing proceedings at preliminary stages will result in finality without the parties having had an opportunity to adduce evidence and the consequence then is that the proper forum i.e., the trial Court is ousted from weighing the material evidence. If this is allowed, the accused may be given an un-merited advantage in the criminal process. Also because of the legal presumption, when the cheque and the signature are not disputed by the appellant, the balance of convenience at this stage is in favour of the complainant/prosecution, as the accused will have due opportunity to adduce defence evidence during the trial, to rebut the presumption.
17. Yet, in another case between Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Limited Versus Mohd.Sharaful Haque, 2005 (1) SCC 122, the Hon'ble Apex Court observed in para 11 as under:-
"11. ... the powers possessed by the High Court under Section 482 of the Code are very wide and the very plenitude of the power requires great caution in its exercise. Court must be careful to see that its decision in exercise of this power is based on sound principles. The inherent power should not be exercised to stifle a legitimate prosecution. The High Court being the Page 16 of 24 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Wed Mar 19 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 19 23:29:24 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17784/2018 CAV ORDER DATED: 19/03/2025 undefined highest court of a State should normally refrain from giving a prima facie decision in a case where the entire facts are incomplete and hazy, more so when the evidence has not been collected and produced before the court and the issues involved, whether factual or legal, are of magnitude and cannot be seen in their true perspective without sufficient material. of course, no hard-and-fast rule can be laid down in regard to cases in which the High Court will exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction of quashing the proceeding at any stage. It would not be proper for the High Court to analyse the case of the complainant in the light of all probabilities in order to determine whether a conviction would be sustainable and on such premise arrive at a conclusion that the proceedings are to be quashed. It would be erroneous to assess the material before it and conclude that the complaint cannot be proceeded with. In a proceeding instituted on complaint, exercise of the inherent powers to quash the proceedings is called for only in a case where the complaint does not disclose any offence or is frivolous, vexatious or oppressive. If the allegations set out in the complaint do not constitute the offence of which cognizance has been taken by the Magistrate, it is open to the High Court to quash the same in exercise of the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code. It is not, however, necessary that there should be meticulous analysis of the case before the trial to find out whether the case would end in conviction or acquittal. The complaint has to be read as a whole. If it appears that on consideration of the allegations in the light of the statement made on oath of the complainant that the ingredients of the offence or offences are disclosed and there is no material to show that the complaint is mala fide, frivolous or vexatious, in that event there would be no justification for interference by the High Court. When an information is lodged at the police station and an offence is registered, then the mala fides of the informant would be of secondary importance. It is the material collected during the investigation and evidence led in court which decides the fate of the accused person. The allegations of mala fides against the informant are of no consequence and cannot by Page 17 of 24 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Wed Mar 19 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 19 23:29:24 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17784/2018 CAV ORDER DATED: 19/03/2025 undefined themselves be the basis for quashing the proceedings."
18. Reference may be made to the case of Sanapareddy Maheedhar Seshagiri v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2007) 13 SCC 165, the Hon'ble Apex Court held as under:-
"31. A careful reading of the abovenoted judgments makes it clear that the High Court should be extremely cautious and slow to interfere with the investigation and/or trial of criminal cases and should not stall the investigation and/or prosecution except when it is convinced beyond any manner of doubt that FIR does not disclose commission of any offence or that the allegations contained in FIR do not constitute any cognizable offence or that the prosecution is barred by law or the High Court is convinced that it is necessary to interfere to prevent abuse of the process of the Court. In dealing with such cases, the High Court has to bear in mind that judicial intervention at the threshold of the legal process initiated against a person accused of committing offence is highly detrimental to the larger public and societal interest. The people and the society have a legitimate expectation that those committing offences either against an individual or the society are expeditiously brought to trial and, if found guilty, adequately punished. Therefore, while deciding a petition filed for quashing FIR or complaint or restraining the competent authority from investigating the allegations contained in FIR or complaint or for stalling the trial of the case, the High Court should be extremely careful and circumspect. If the allegations contained in FIR or complaint disclose commission of some crime, then the High Court must keep its hands off and allow the investigating agency to complete the investigation without any fetter and also refrain from passing order which may impede the trial. The High Court should not go into the merits and demerits of the allegations simply because the petitioner alleges malus animus against the author of FIR or the complainant. The High Court must also refrain from making imaginary journey in the realm of possible harassment Page 18 of 24 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Wed Mar 19 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 19 23:29:24 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17784/2018 CAV ORDER DATED: 19/03/2025 undefined which may be caused to the petitioner on account of investigation of FIR or complaint. Such a course will result in miscarriage of justice and would encourage those accused of committing crimes to repeat the same. However, if the High Court is satisfied that the complaint does not disclose commission of any offence or prosecution is barred by limitation or that the proceedings of criminal case would result in failure of justice, then it may exercise inherent power under Section 482 CrPC."
19. Coming back to facts of the case, it would not be justified to analyze FIR and charge sheet papers threadbare to hold mini trial to record acquittal of the applicants. It is not case where on the basis of FIR and statement made therein and material collected during investigation does not disclose that accused are not involved in the commission of offence. In fact prima facie impression of FIR and evidence collected during investigation demonstrate that the applicants are kingpin and top banana. At the cost of repetition, it can be said that the applicants who are in custody of revenue records develop idea to prepare manual village form no.7/12, despite it has been banned. Solitary village form no.7/12 was forged and fabricated without examining entries in village form no.6 which exists in the name of State Government, accused have mutated entry of Bachu Bhavan and heirs in village form no.7/12. Hence, source of mutation entry though is form no.6 without having any mutation of name of Bachu Bhavan, entries of heirs were mutated in village form no.7/12. It is unique idea to grab government land. The applicants who are guardian of revenue record are expected to have knowledge of village form no.6 and village form no.7/12 and expected to mutate entry only after following procedure laid down in provision.
Page 19 of 24 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Wed Mar 19 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 19 23:29:24 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17784/2018 CAV ORDER DATED: 19/03/2025 undefined
20. Learned advocate Mr.Patel for the petitioners though argued that the petitioners were performing their official duties, failed to point out that how without entering name of Bachu Bhavan in village form no.6 and that too in absence of any transaction recognized under the TP Act, entry could be directly made in village form no.7/12. Specific question pointed out to him remained unanswered.
21. The Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of decisions laid down scope and ambit of High Court's power under section 482 of Cr.P.C. Inherent power though wide has to be exercised sparingly, carefully and with caution only where such exercise is justified by the tests laid down in the section itself. The powers of High Court under section 482 of Cr.P.C. are very wide and very plenitude of the power requires great caution in its exercise. The Court is expected to be careful to see that its decision in exercise of power is based on sound principle. The inherent power should not be exercised to stifle a legitimate prosecution.
22. Worthy reference may be made to the decision in case of Central Bureau Of Investigation Versus A.Ravishankar Prasad, 2009 (6) SCC 351, the Hon'ble Apex Court observed in para 17, 18, 19 and 23 as under :-
"17. We have largely inherited the provisions of inherent powers from the English jurisprudence, therefore the principles decided by the English Courts would be of relevance for us. It is generally agreed that the Crown Court has inherent power to protect its process from abuse. The English Courts have also used inherent power to achieve the same objective.Page 20 of 24 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Wed Mar 19 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 19 23:29:24 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17784/2018 CAV ORDER DATED: 19/03/2025 undefined
18. In Connelly V/s. DPP [1964] AC 1254, Lord Devlin while dealing with similar provisions under the English law stated that where particular criminal proceedings constitute an abuse of process, the Court is empowered to refuse to allow the indictment to proceed to trial.
19. Lord Salmon in DPP V/s. Humphrys [1977] AC 1 stressed the importance of the inherent power when he observed that it is only if the prosecution amounts to an abuse of the process of the Court and is oppressive and vexatious that the judge has the power to intervene. He further stated that the Court's power to prevent such abuse is of great constitutional importance and should be jealously preserved.
23. In another leading case State of Haryana & Others V/s. Bhajan Lal & Others 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335, this Court in the backdrop of interpretation of various relevant provisions of the Cr.P.C. under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India or the inherent powers under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. gave the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of the Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. Thus, this Court made it clear that it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list to myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised:
[(1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint. even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.] [(2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Sec. 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Sec. 155(2) of the Page 21 of 24 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Wed Mar 19 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 19 23:29:24 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17784/2018 CAV ORDER DATED: 19/03/2025 undefined Code.] [(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused.] [(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a Police Officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code.] [(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.] [(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.] [(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.]"
23. In the case on hand, allegations of forgering papers and use of forged documents i.e. manual preparation of village form no.7/12 without taking source and transfer of subject land, resulting into grabbing of government land, prima facie establish on record. The contentions raised by learned advocate for the Page 22 of 24 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Wed Mar 19 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 19 23:29:24 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17784/2018 CAV ORDER DATED: 19/03/2025 undefined applicants are disputed question of facts and could have led during trial. FIR at this stage taking on its face value
24. Lastly, worth to take assistance of the judgment in case of State of Kerala v. O.C. Kuttan [(1999) 2 SCC 651, whereby the Hon'ble Apex Court held that what should be observed by the Court while exercising jurisdiction u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing the investigation. Relevant para reads as under:-
"Having said so, the Court gave a note of caution to the effect that the power of quashing the criminal proceedings should be exercised very sparingly with circumspection and that too in the rarest of rare cases; that the court will not be justified in embarking upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint and that the extraordinary or inherent powers do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the court to act according to its whim or caprice. It is too well settled that the first information report is only an initiation to move the machinery and to investigate into a cognizable offence and, therefore, while exercising the power and deciding whether the investigation itself should be quashed, utmost care should be taken by the court and at that stage, it is not possible for the court to sift the materials or to weigh the materials and then come to the conclusion one way or the other. In the case of State of U.P. v. O.P. Sharma [(1996) 7 SCC 705 : 1996 SCC (Cri) 497 : JT (1996) 2 SC 488] a three-Judge Bench of this Court indicated that the High Court should be loath to interfere at the threshold to thwart the prosecution exercising its inherent power under Section 482 or under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, as the case may be, and allow the law to take its own course. The same view was reiterated by yet another three-Judge Bench of this Court in the case of Rashmi Kumar v. Mahesh Kumar Bhada [(1997) 2 SCC 397 :Page 23 of 24 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Wed Mar 19 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 19 23:29:24 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17784/2018 CAV ORDER DATED: 19/03/2025 undefined 1997 SCC (Cri) 415 : JT (1996) 11 SC 175] where this Court sounded a word of caution and stated that such power should be sparingly and cautiously exercised only when the court is of the opinion that otherwise there will be gross miscarriage of justice. The Court had also observed that social stability and order is required to be regulated by proceeding against the offender as it is an offence against society as a whole."
25. For the foregoing reasons, since the petitioners failed to make out case for exercise of inherent jurisdiction, the petition deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, the petitions stand dismissed. Notice discharged. Interim relief, if any, granted earlier stands vacated.
26. Needless to state that above finding and observations are limited to decision of this petition only.
(J. C. DOSHI,J) FURTHER ORDER After pronouncement of the judgment learned advocate Mr.Patel for the petitioner seeks to extend interim relief facilitating him to approach the higher Court. The request is fervently objected by the learned APP. For the reasons recorded in the aforesaid order, request is rejected.
(J. C. DOSHI,J) SHEKHAR P. BARVE / SATISH / SOMPURA Page 24 of 24 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Wed Mar 19 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 19 23:29:24 IST 2025