IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Prakash Chandra Gupta, JJ.
Narendra Jain & Another v. Lokayukta Police Establishment & Others
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 32331 of 2021 (Indore); Decided on 16.6.2023
Criminal P.C. 1973 -- S. 482 -- Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 -- S. 13(2)(d) and 13(2) -- Penal Code, 1860 -- S. 120B -- quashing of FIR -- petitioners not public servants -- implicated on charge of criminal conspiracy -- even if it is presumed that petitioners deliberately or fraudulently produced true copy of unregistered sale deed to mutate disputed property and to take permission for constructing residential-cum-commercial complex upon it, it does not constitute offence u/s. 120B of IPC -- case purely civil in nature -- question whether petitioners properly calculated and paid stamp duty and were under obligation to pay remaining stamp duty for registration of sale deed still pending for adjudication -- FIR quashed. (2018) 5 SCC 678, (2014) 15 SCC 221, (2012) 4 SCC 547, (2019) 10 SCC 337, (2018) 5 SCC 718, (2010) 5 SCC 600, (2019) 2 SCC 336, (2012) 9 SCC 460, (2011) 12 SCC 319, (2019) 13 SCC 350, (2010) 11 SCC 226, (2012) 12 SCC 437, (2019) 10 SCC 373, (2009) 9 SCC 682, CBI (2019) 10 SCC 686, 2023 Live Law (SC) 67, 2022 Live Law (SC) 110, 2022 Live Law (SC) 1033, (2009)11 SCC 737, 2023 (3) JLJ 117 (SC) = 2022 Live Law (SC) 709 and 2022 Live Law (SC) 106 followed. [Paras 27, 30 & 32]
naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & èkkjk 482 & Òz"Vkpkj fuokj.k vfèkfu;e] 1988 & èkkjk 13¼2½¼Ä½ rFkk 13¼2½ & naM lafgrk] 1860 & èkkjk 120[k & çFke bfÙkyk fji¨VZ dk vfÒ[kaMu & ;kphx.k y¨d lsod ugha & vkijkfèkd "kM;a= d¢ vkj¨i ls vkfyIr & ;g mièkkj.kk dj Òh yh tk, fd ;kphx.k us fookfnr laifÙk dk ukekarj.k djkus v©j ml ij vkoklh; lg&okf.kfTd ç{ks= fufeZr djus dh vuqKk çkIr djus d¢ fy, tkucw> dj ;k diViwoZd vjftLVªhÑr foØ; foys[k dh lR; çfrfyfi is'k dh] r¨ mlls naM lafgrk dh èkkjk 120[k d¢ vèkhu vijkèk xfBr ugha g¨rk & çdj.k fo'kq)r% flfoy çÑfr dk & bl ç'u dk U;k;fu.kZ;u vÒh yafcr fd D;k ;kphx.k us LVkai 'kqYd dh mfpr lax.kuk dj mldk lank; fd;k rFkk D;k foØ; foys[k d¢ jftLVªhdj.k d¢ fy, og 'ks"k LVkai 'kqYd lanÙk djus dh ckè;rk d¢ vèkhu Fks & çFke bfÙkyk fji¨VZ vfÒ[kafMrA ¼2018½ 5 ,l lh lh 678] ¼2014½ 15 ,l lh lh 221] ¼2012½ 4 ,l lh lh 547] ¼2019½ 10 ,l lh lh 337] ¼2018½ 5 ,l lh lh 718] ¼2010½ 5 ,l lh lh 600] ¼2019½ 2 ,l lh lh 336] ¼2012½ 9 ,l lh lh 460] ¼2011½ 12 ,l lh lh 319] ¼2019½ 13 ,l lh lh 350] ¼2010½ 11 ,l lh lh 226] ¼2012½ 12 ,l lh lh 437] ¼2019½ 10 ,l lh lh 373] ¼2009½ 9 ,l lh lh 682] ¼2019½ 10 ,l lh lh 686] 2023 ykbo ykW ¼,l lh½ 67] 2022 ykbo ykW ¼,l lh½ 110] 2022 ykbo ykW ¼,l lh½ 1033] ¼2009½ 11 ,l lh lh 737] 2023 ¼3½ ts ,y ts 117 ¼mPpre U;k;ky;½ % 2022 ykbo ykW ¼,l lh½ 709 rFkk 2022 ykbo ykW ¼,l lh½ 106 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 27] 30 ,oa 32½
ORDER
1. The petitioners have filed the present petition under section 482 of The Criminal Procedure Code for quashing the first information report bearing crime number 141/2012 dated 21.7.2012 registered by Special police establishment office of lokayukt Ujjain and to quash all other consequential proceedings arising out of the same FIR.
2. Before evaluating the merits of the case, the facts of the present case as per FIR, in nutshell are--
(i) The petitioners had purchased a plot bearing Municipal number 96 and 96 admeasuring 1050 square metres or 11298 square feet situated at Lal Bahadur Shastri Marg sanver Road District Ujjain (hereinafter referred as disputed property) from Jitendra bhai son of late Shri Shiv bhai Patel for a consideration of Rs. 1 crore on 11th January 2010. In order to get the same sale as a registered contract, petitioners booked a registration slot at the Sub Registrar Office, District Ujjain M.P by paying a stamp duty of rupees 7.5 lacs, Municipal duty of rupees 1 lacs, Panchayat duty of rupees 1 lacs, registration fee of rupees 37,450/-, Consent fee of rupees 10, total rupees 9,87,500/- was deposited by the petitioners for the registration of sale deed.
(ii) The police while investigating has recorded the statement of sub registrar Mr. Girish Chaurasia who in his statement has stated that, “the petitioner paid the duty of Rs 9,87,500/- to get the sale deed registered but on the contrary when Mr. Girish Chaurasiya did the inspection of the disputed property he found out that the disputed property is of commercial nature and the petitioners while booking the slot has neither calculated the stamp duty properly nor paid the proper stamp duty according to the collector guidelines of year 2009-2010. Mr. Girish Chaurasiya asked petitioners to pay the adequate stamp duty as per the Collector Guidelines but the petitioners refused to pay the extra stamp duty therefore the sale deed was not registered and Mr. Girish Chaurasiya vide his letter No. 21 dated 4.2.2010 brought this matter to the knowledge of Senior District Registrar and Collector of Stamps, District, Ujjain.
(iii) The Office of Senior District Registrar and Collector of Stamps District Ujjain by taking cognizance upon the above mentioned letter has filed a case number 45/V/105-2009-10 against the petitioners and in the same case the Court of Senior District Registrar and Collector of Stamps District Ujjain vide order dated 21.5.2012 it was directed to the petitioner to deposit the amount of Rs. 21,76,250 in the district treasury within next 30 days for the registration of unregistered sale deed.
(iv) The petitioners, being aggrieved by the order dated 21.5.2012 passed by the Court of Senior District Registrar and Collector of Stamps District Ujjain filed an appeal No. 202/2011-12/Appeal before the Court of Divisional Commissioner, Ujjain Division, District Ujjain. The Court of Divisional Commissioner, Ujjain Division, District Ujjain, rejected the said appeal and affirmed the order dated 22.10.2012 passed by the Court of Senior District Registrar and Collector of Stamps, District Ujjain.
(v) The petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 22.10.2012 passed by the Court of Commissioner Ujjain Division District Ujjain, filed an appeal No. 4100/PBR/2012 before The Revenue Board of Madhya Pradesh at Gwalior, which was rejected vide order dated 25.6.2013 and the Order dated 22.10.2012 passed by the Court of Commissioner Ujjain Division District Ujjain was affirmed. However, the petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 25/06/2013 passed by the Revenue Board, Gwalior has filed a WP/10530/2013 which is still pending for the final disposal before this Court.
(vi) During the ongoing process of litigation before various quasijudicial Courts, the Petitioner approached his advocate Shri Umesh R Chaurasia to get the true copy of the unregistered sale deed. Deputy registrar Shree M.L. Patel who is the head of the copying section of the District
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the inherent power under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code should be sparingly used and only in exceptional cases to prevent abuse of....
The power to quash criminal proceedings should be exercised sparingly and only when the allegations do not disclose a prima facie case of a criminal offence.
The High Court's inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash FIRs are exercised sparingly to prevent abuse of process, necessitating sufficient grounds warranting quashing.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the inherent jurisdiction of the court under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code can be exercised to prevent abuse of the process of la....
The court emphasized the need for compelling reasons of abuse of process of law or glaring injustice to exercise jurisdiction under Sec. 482, and highlighted the necessity to balance law enforcement ....
Inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be applied cautiously, primarily to prevent abuse of process, and FIRs should not be quashed prematurely when allegations disclose a cognizable offenc....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.