SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Pat) 142

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
BIBEK CHAUDHURI, J.
Cr. WJC No.222 of 2021
(10.4.2024)
Ajay Mehta ... Petitioner
vs.
State of Bihar & Ors. ... Respondents

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: M/s Kumar Dhirendra Pratap Singh, Shubhankar Raj.
For the Respondents: M/s M.N.H. Khan, SC-1, Harun Quareshi, AC to SC-1.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code,1860 – Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 482 – Constitution of India – Article 226 – Cheating and forgery – There is absolutely no allegation made against petitioner of committing offence of cheating and forgery – Petitioner is claiming a piece and parcel of land by way of inheritance and partition stating that grandfather of petitioner took settlement of land from Zamindar sometimes in year 1941 – By virtue of R.S. operation respondent authorities are claiming that ownership of land rests on Bihar Government – Record of rights is a document of possession and it does not confirm any title in favour of person in whose name record of rights are prepared – When a competent Civil Court declared that petitioner had right, title and interest over property, Second Appellate Authority under Bihar Right to Public Grievances Redressal Act, 2015 cannot sit over judgment and decree passed by Trial Court – Any authority under Bihar Right to Public Grievances Redressal Act, 2015 cannot adjudicate veracity of an exhibited document of a Civil Court and come to a finding as to whether it was genuine or wrong – Assuming that petitioner fraudulently transferred land in disputed property in favour of Cambodian Buddhist Monastery Trust, Bodhgaya, no such F.I.R. has been lodged by Trust against petitioner – Dispute between parties being essentially civil in nature and criminal case is not maintainable – Principles of quashing F.I.R. under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and Article 226 of Constitution of India are same and identical – F.I.R. quashed and set aside – Writ petition allowed. (Paras 10, 11, 15, 20, 23, 24, 25 and 26)

Bibek Chaudhuri, J. – Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition praying for issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ quashing/setting aside the First Information Report of Civil Lines P.S. Case No. 178 of 2020 registered against him under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is alleged by the petitioner that he became the owner of a piece and parcel of land comprising in Cadastral Survey Khata No.67, Plot No.17, Mauja-Silaunja, Revenue Thana No.442 within police Station Bodh Gaya in the District of Gaya by way of inheritance from his ancestors. According to the petitioner, his grandfather took settlement of land measuring 22.50 acres in C.S. Plot No.17, C.S. Khata No.67 of Village-Silaunja from the Superior Landlord and Intermediary Mahanth Kishan Dayal Giri. Subsequently, the said land was partitioned between the petitioner and his father and the petitioner became absolute owner of 19.50 acres of land in respect of the aforesaid plot. Further, case of the petitioner is that his ancestors used to pay rent to the Jamindar who settled the land in favour of his grandfather against Jamindari rent receipts. After abolition of jamindari system and vesting of jamandari rights the grandfather of the plaintiff mutated his name in the Anchal Office and he used to pay rent to the Government in respect of the said land. The petitioner alleges that during revisional survey the land was wrongly recorded in the name of the State of Bihar. Sometimes, in the year 1984 when the title of the petitioner remained under cloud, he filed Title Suit No.113 of 2008 which was renumbered as T.S. No.88 of 2008 in the Court of the learned Sub-Judge, Gaya for declaration of his right and title over the disputed property. The said suit was decreed on contest by a judgement and decree dated 22.12.2011 and 24.01.2012 respectively. On 15.03.2015, petitioner sold 06 acres of land to Cambodian Buddhist Monastery Trust, Bodhgaya out of the said 19.50 acres of land by executing a registered deed of sale. The petitioner also delivered possession of the said 06 acres of land to the Cambodian Buddhist Monastery Trust, Bodhgaya. In the year 2016, the Administrative Authority under the State Government initiated an encroachment proceeding against Cambodian Buddhist Monastery Trust, Bodhgaya. Sometimes in January 2017 the said Trust filed a Writ Petition being C.W.J.C. No.1808 of 2017 against the encroachment order. A co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed an order on 04.01.2017 directing the respondents not to take any coercive action against the petitioner till the disposal of the above mentioned writ petition. The said writ petition is still pending before this Court. Inspite of such order, local police under the direction of the concerned department badly ransacked the construction made by the Trust and also assaulted both male and female monks on 17.02.2017. The petitioner filed an intervening petition in C.W.J.C. No.1808 of 2017 and the said petition still pending before this Court. Vide order dated 01.03.2017, this Court passed an order directing the respondents to show cause as to why the order dated 04.02.2017 passed in C.W.J.C. No.1808 of 2017 was violated.

4. In the meantime, title appeal filed by the State of Bihar against the judgment and decree passed in Title Suit No.113 of 2008 renumbered as 88 of 2008 was dismissed by the First Appellate Court and the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court were affirmed. The State of Bihar has filed a Second Appeal against the judgment and decree passed in Title Suit No.27 of 2014 before this Court and the said appeal is still pending. Sometimes in the month of January, 2020 on the basis of some complaint made against the petitioner a proceeding was initiated under the Bihar Right to Public Grievance Redressal Act, 2015. The Second Appellate Authority


























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top