IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1241 of 2013 ==========================================================

THAKOR NATVARJI BHIKHAJI & ORS.

Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR DILIP L KANOJIYA(3691) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 MR SHUSHIL R SHUKLA(5603) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MR. CHINTAN DAVE ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s)

No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI Date : 30/07/2025

ORAL ORDER

1. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioners have prayed to quash and set aside the impugned Inquiry Case No. 1 of 2013 registered with Kheda Police Station.

2. Brief facts of the case are as under :

2.1 That one Amruthbhai Patel father of the complainant was owner of 21 bighas of land of village Kheda bearing block Nos. 658, 604, 636-1+2 paiki 2, 652, 653 paiki 2 paiki, 601-2 paiki 2, 653/2 paiki 2 paiki, 654/1+2 and 656. The land bearing block No. 658 admeasuring about 6 bighas of land was a restricted tenure land whereas other block numbers were old tenure marketable lands.

2.2 As all the owners of the 21 bighas of land were inclined to sell the lands an agreement of sale was executed on 6.11.2008 by the said owners in favour of Ramaji Bhikhaji Thakor. The first sale deed was in favour of petitioner No. 2 and was executed by Varshaben Ashokbhai, Bhavika Ashokbhai and Purvesh Ashokbhai, heirs of the brother of the complainant. The second sale deed was executed by the complainant in favour of Thakor Natvarji, Kashiben Natvarbhai, Thakor Juvansinh, Thakor Pravinsinh and Thakor Vijaykumar, petitioners 1, 3 an 7 herein. The mutation entry of the said sale was also posted in the revenue records in April, 2009 after following the requisite procedure.

2.3 For 6 bighas of new tenure land requisite permission was required to be obtained under Section 43 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. The vendors were directed to pay an amount of Rs. 8,21125/- by way of premium. On 10.8.2008, the said amount was paid by the complainant and others. On 23.8.2010 an application was made to the Collector producing the payment receipt.

2.4 The mutation entry of the said order was posted in the revenue records being mutation entry No. 16841 dated 29.9.2010. As prescribed under the Land Revenue Code notice under Section 135-D was issued to the owners.

2.5 The application for changing the tenure of the land was made by the vendors. The payment of premium was made by the vendors and mutation entry of the said order was also posted after issuing notice to the vendors.

2.6 On the basis of the Power of Attorney which was given on 6.2.2009 by the vendors, the petitioner No.1 by transferring the said land in favour of the petitioners, mutation entry of the said sale deed being mutaton entry No. 16950 was posted in the revenue record on 11.2.2011, and the notices under Section 135-D were sent to the respective owners, the vendors of the land.

2.7 The facts set out clearly establish that the complainant and the other owners of the lands in question had executed the power of attorney in favour of the first petitioner, who has on the strength of the said power of attorney executed the sale deed in favour of the petitioners conveying the property of the respondent No. 2 and the others to the petitioners. The said sale deed was executed in 2010 and mutation entry of the said sale deed was also posted in the revenue record. The Tenancy authorities also recorded statements of the owners which was duly signed by the owners. It is further alleged that the applications were made to the tenancy authorities by forging their signatures that they had no knowledge of the proceedings before the tenancy authorities and that the proceedings were conducted on the basis of bogus signatures of the complainant and others.

2.8 It is