The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the Judges (Protection) Act 1985 and the Indian Penal Code in protecting the actions of quasi-judicial authorities, and the principle that interference is not called for when the allegations in the complaint or FIR are sufficient to constitute the commission of a cognizable offence.

JUDGMENT :

1. This common order shall govern the disposal of M.Cr.C. Nos. 10001, 10002 and 10003 of 2013.

2. These three separate applications under section 482, Criminal Procedure Code led by applicants who were Deputy Registrar Co-operative Societies, Indore, in succession. Rajkumar s/o Dwarka Prasad Sharma, applicant in M.Cr.C. No. 10003/2013 was posted at Indore as Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies from 1-1-2002 to 11-7-2005, applicant Ambrish Vaidya s/o Late Shri S.D. Vaidya in M.Cr.C. No. 10002/2013 was posted after applicant Rajkumar on the same post from 11-7-2005 to 25-8-2009 and finally, Mahendra Dixit, applicant in M.Cr.C. No. 10001/2013 was posted from 29-9-2009 till filing of the application in 2013.

3. Facts relevant for disposal of these applications common to all the three matters are that a complaint was lodged at Malharganj Police Station at Indore on 9-6-2011, on which the crime No. 257/2011 under sections 406 and 420/34 was registered by Police Station at Malharganj. The FIR was lodged by one Mohansingh s/o Hastimalji Lalan who is respondent No. 2. In these petitions, accused Nos. 5 to 7 are present applicants who were working as Deputy Registrar Cooperative Societies. The allegations in FIR against the present applicants are as follows :-

4. Accordingly, the allegation against the present applicants were that even after hearing arguments many times, no order was passed, separate orders were not passed on 26th proceedings and in different cases without any application, orders were passed.

5. The genesis of dispute goes back to year 1985, when, 27 persons obtained membership of Maharana Pratap Nagar Co-operative Ltd. Society, Indore and deposited Rs. 5000/- each for purchase of plots to be developed by the society. The colony was named as Vindhyachal Nagar Indore. It was conditioned of the allotment that remaining part of purchase money Rs. 6000/- shall be paid in monthly instalment of Rs. 200/- per month. As per the agreement, duty was cast on the society to obtain necessary permissions and clearances from various government departments. It was later on discovered that the land which was to be allotted to the aforesaid 27 members were part of green belt area of the town. The society took necessary steps to get this area converted into residential area. This permission was granted on 3-2-2000 and the land comprised in green belt area was converted into residential area. No permission under Urban Ceiling Act was required as the Act was already repealed. Therefore, it was said that with such conversion from green belt area to residential area, the society was in position to allot the plots to above 27 members. When the members insisted for allotment of the plots, the society refused to allot plot, therefore, a dispute arose and the 27 members filed dispute cases before the Deputy Registrar Co-operative Society. Along with dispute cases, applications under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2, Civil Procedure Code were also filed which were dismissed by Deputy Registrar Public Societies Act. The appeal was filed before the Joint Registrar and second appeal was filed before Co-operative Tribunal and matter finally travelled to this Court in Writ Petition No. 814/2002 which was dismissed on 4-9-2002. After this, the present applicants approached Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies where the matter remained pending till the complaint was lodged and therefore, the above mentioned allegations were levelled against them and on the basis of such allegations the above crime was registered.

6. In backdrop of this factual background, these applications are filed on the ground that all 27 dispute cases were similar in nature and, therefore, a consolidated proceedings were being carried in all the cases as such, the main order was passed in one case which was made applicable in all other cases as all the applicants were similarly placed. As Deputy Registrar Co-operative Societies, the applicants were acting as Judges of quasi jud