High Court Draws Line Between Civil and Criminal Law in Land Dispute Case, Quashes Charges
In a significant ruling, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore has quashed criminal proceedings related to a land dispute case, emphasizing the need to differentiate between civil and criminal issues in property disputes. The bench led by Hon’ble Shri Justice Vivek Rusia delivered a comprehensive judgment in the case involving allegations of forgery and cheating over a land sale in Ratlam, Madhya Pradesh.
The case, involving several parties including Dinesh Sharma, a Station House Officer, and Anurag Shukla, a business owner, revolved around a complex land transaction dispute. The court found that the allegations against Anurag Shukla, who was accused of participating in the fraudulent sale of land, were baseless as he was a bonafide purchaser of the land sold to him in 1998 by Subodh Mishra.
Justice Rusia, in his ruling, noted, “The entire cheating, at the most, is said to have been committed by Subodh Mishra and not by Anurag Shukla.” The judgment emphasized that Anurag Shukla had no knowledge of the alleged transaction between Rakesh Vyas and Subodh Mishra, making his subsequent sale of land to Seema Sharma and others legitimate. As a result, Anurag Shukla and others were discharged from all charges.
The court also quashed the proceedings against Dinesh Sharma, stating that there was no evidence of him concealing information or being in connivance with Subodh Mishra. The judgment underscored the importance of judicial scrutiny over police reports, stating, “The report submitted by the Investigating Officer is never binding on the court and the court is always competent to reject the report.”
Highlighting the civil nature of the dispute, the court referenced Supreme Court judgments, including the case of Mohammed Ibrahim & Others v/s The State of Bihar & Another, which differentiates between civil and criminal aspects in property transactions. Justice Rusia remarked, “In order to avoid payment of stamp duty as well as court fees, a trend has been developed to get an F.I.R. registered under Sections of IPC, and thereafter, to pressurize the seller either to return the amount or execute the sale deed.”
D.D.20.Nov.2023
DINESH SHARMA VS THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
