Back
Supreme Court Unleashes SIT to Safeguard Maharishi's Spiritual Legacy from Land Mafia Grip
In a decisive blow against alleged organized land fraud, the has overturned an interim order that stalled a police charge-sheet in a Noida fraud case. A bench comprising Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar not only cleared the path for the investigating officer to file the report under but also mandated a under Uttar Pradesh's Chief Secretary to probe the rampant unauthorized sales of lands owned by the —a society founded under the guidance of His Holiness Maharishi Mahesh Yogi.
The ruling, delivered in Shrikant Ojha v. State of UP & Ors. (2026 INSC 482), underscores that High Courts cannot issue blanket stays impeding statutory police duties, drawing a firm line on investigative interference.
A Society's Sacred Assets Turn Battleground
Established in under the , the foundation aimed at spiritual upliftment and societal benefit, amassing freehold properties across states like Uttar Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, and Madhya Pradesh. Post the founder's passing, factional rivalries erupted: one group led by Sh. Ajay Prakash Srivastava, the other by G. Ram Chandramohan and associates, including Akash Malviya and Pradip Singh.
This rift fueled a trail of alleged forgeries and sales. Key flashpoints include:
-
: Civil suits in Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) declaring sales void; FIRs under , and others in multiple stations.
-
Noida specifics
: FIR No. 642/2025 at PS Noida Sector 39 accused Chandramohan, Malviya, and others of selling society land to
, directed by Pradip Singh and respondent Raghvendra Pratap Singh—despite prior FIRs (294/2023, 152/2025) and court injunctions.
- Parallel cases in Jabalpur, Shajapur, and Delhi courts highlight a pattern of
"
,"
as the bench noted.
Complainant Shrikant Ojha appealed the High Court's , order in a quash petition by respondent No. 2, which permitted investigation but barred the charge-sheet, citing civil dispute precedents.
Complainant Cries Foul on Repeat Offenders, Accused Invoke Civil Shield
Ojha's counsel hammered the persistence: despite injunctions, bails, and FIRs, lands kept vanishing via forged powers of attorney and bogus office-bearer lists. The society's Registrar report confirmed dual management claims, with matters pending in (WP(C) 8525/2024). Lands were freehold, not leased—undisputed by the State—amplifying fraud gravity.
Respondent No. 2 leaned on and , arguing civil title disputes shouldn't spawn criminal probes. The High Court echoed this, invoking Pradnya Pranjal Kulkarni v. State of Maharashtra ((2025) SCC Online 1948) for the charge-sheet freeze.
Dissecting Precedents: No Blanket Freeze on Police Powers
The apex court shredded the High Court's approach. In
Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra
((2021) 19 SCC 401), it slammed "cryptic" no-coercion orders as eroding CrPC/BNSS investigative mandates—echoed here:
"such a
... affects the powers of the investigating agency."
Pradnya Pranjal Kulkarni
was distinguished sharply: it delineated
(pre-cognizance) from
quashing (post-cognizance), not justifying charge-sheet halts.
"We do not find any reason to direct stay on filing of the chargesheet,"
the bench ruled.
Invoking
Pratibha Manchanda v. State of Haryana
((2023) 8 SCC 181) on land scams—
"organised criminal networks... erode public trust"
—the court widened the lens, terming sales
"contrary to the object and purpose of society."
Court's Voice: Echoes of Concern and Commands
Key Observations from the judgment:
"Even then they disposed the property of the society taking the law in their hand..."
"Land scams in India have been a persistent issue, involving fraudulent practices... resort[ing] to intimidation or threats..."
"After the death of its founder, it was not intended by him that the friction within groups shall lead to fights and the property which was quite valuable, shall be sold for their own interest contrary to the purpose and object."
Verdict: Charge-Sheet Greenlight, SIT Takes Helm
The court vacated the stay, directing the Noida IO to file the BNSS report promptly. Broader remedy: An SIT, supervised by UP Chief Secretary with aboard, to catalog lands, trace alienations, and report within three months—triggering FIRs if -laced fraud emerges.
No coercion against respondent No. 2 till report/investigation ends, but full accused cooperation mandated. The SIT report goes to for the pending writ, ensuring oversight.
This expands probes beyond one FIR, potentially unifying multi-state litanies (per other reports like LiveLaw's coverage). Future-wise, it fortifies police autonomy against premature judicial halts, signaling zero tolerance for society asset grabs disguised as internal feuds—preserving legacies like Maharishi's for public good.
