The judgment established the importance of protecting constitutional and statutory property rights, emphasizing the finality of legal documents such as Sale Deeds and Mutation Orders, and the court's duty to enforce legal duties through the issuance of a writ of Mandamus.

JUDGMENT

Petitioner claims that he purchased a piece of land measuring 5 ½ Marlas falling under Khasra no.497, Khewat no.15, Khata no.141, situated at Barnai Bantalab Tehsil and District Jammu, from one, Mohinder Singh son of Vachiter Singh resident of Kool Kalal Kamia Tehsil Bishnah District Jammu, vide Sale Deed dated 10th June 2014, which was duly registered by Sub Registrar, on 9th July 2014, and on the basis of Sale Deed he was inducted into possession of the land. He also avers that mutation was effected on 31st July 2014, in favour of petitioner vide Mutation Order no.1345. Petitioners claims that he constructed two rooms, kitchen and bathroom on the aforesaid land. Petitioner maintains that necessity arose for him for sale of aforesaid land and accordingly, he approached respondent no.3 for issuance of ‘Fard Intikhab Jamabandi’. However, its issuance was declined in view of investigation in case FIR no.23/2014 of police station Crime Branch, Jammu. Petitioner contends that FIR was registered on 2nd December 2014 against Women Selection Grade Constable Nirmal Kour no.211/IR-15th Bn (wife of Mohinder Singh) and aforesaid seller, Mohinder Singh, for offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 120B. According to petitioner, aforesaid land owned by him has nothing to do with abovementioned FIR, but respondent no.2 vide letter no.CBJ/FIR- 23/14/21078 dated 21st December 2015, asked respondent no.3 not to allow alienation of aforesaid land till further communication from respondent no.2 and to this effect entry be also made in revenue records. It is stated in writ petition that respondent no.2 has no authority to create any restriction on the sale of aforesaid land and therefore communication dated 21st December 2015 is bad in law. It is on the basis of case set up that petitioner seeks quashment of communication dated 21st December 2015, addressed by respondent no.2 to respondent no.3 in respect of the aforesaid land of petitioner. Petitioner also beseeches a direction to respondent no.2 to issue Fard Intikhab Jamabandi in respect of land of petitioner measuring 5 ½ Marlas situated at Barnai Bantalab, Jammu.

2. Given the case set up and reliefs implored for by petitioner, a Bench of this Court on 30th August 2017, issued, in the first instance, notice to respondent no.2 for his Response, in particular, on the point as to how land in question was involved in case FIR no.23/2014 of police station Crime Branch Jammu.

3. Respondent no.2 submitted the Response/Status Report on 14th November 2017. In his Status Report, respondent no.2 has stated that an enquiry report, forwarded by Commandant, IRP 15th Bn. Jammu, through Inspector General of Police, Armed/IRP, Jammu Zone, Jammu, was received in Crime Branch, Jammu, which reveals that written complaints were filed by Women Constable, Veena Devi no.533/lRP 15th Battalion, and Women Constable Sabeena Akhter no.544/lRP, 15th Battalion, to the effect that Women Selection Grade Constable Nirmal Kour no.211/lRP 15th Battalion had taken a sum of Rs. 2.00 lakhs (Rs.1.00 lakh each) from them fraudulently on the pretext that she would repay an interest of Rs. 5000/- per month, but neither such interest nor was principle amount paid and thus accused had cheated them and misappropriated their money. Upon receiving the complaint, a discreet enquiry was conducted, in which it was found that Nirmal Kour in connivance with her husband, Mohinder Singh, had collected a huge amount of cash and gold, not only from complainants but from other women officials of 15th Battalion and securing wing, illegally after alluring them high rate of interest and gold loan facilities, but had deposited the cash with some finance company and gold with Manapuraam Bank, Satwari, Jammu, for their personal use, thereby cheated and duped fellow officials and misappropriate the collected amount of Rs.1.50 Crores and gold, about 300 grams approximately. These omissions and commissions, according to respondent, constitute offe