Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 387 (RAJ)

Chandrashekhar Sharma v. State of Rajasthan

2025-02-17

FARJAND ALI

body2025
ORDER : (FARJAND ALI, J.) 1. The instant criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (“hereinafter to be referred as “BNSS”) (corresponding of Section 482 of Cr.P.C.) for quashing of the FIR No.243/2024 registered at Police Station Nawa, District Deedwana-Kuchaman for the offence under Sections 379, 467, 468 and 471 of the IPC. 2. Briefly stating the facts of the case are that the complainant filed a complaint against the petitioner Chandrashekhar Sharma. He unlawfully accessed the land records section of the Nagar Palika Nawa (hereinafter to be reffered as “NPN”) and, without due authorization, fraudulently obtained and registered Patta Paper in his name. The registration was conducted without the mandatory signature of the Chairman, NPN, relying instead on the signature of the Acting Officer. The said patta file was incomplete and ineligible for issuance, yet the petitioner, through misrepresentation and fraudulent means, procured its registration. Upon review, the Chairman of NPN discovered the irregularities and initiated an inquiry, revealing that he had unlawfully removed the government document from the NPN office and subsequently executed a fraudulent registration. Upon examination, it was confirmed that the registration occurred on 03.04.2024 without proper authorization and in violation of due process. In light of the above, the NPN has lodged a formal complaint, seeking legal action against the petitioner for theft of government records from the NPN office. Secondly, for fraudulent preparation and registration of forged documents. Additionally, for committing forgery for the purpose of cheating and tampering with government records and uses a forged document as genuine. 3. Leaned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the FIR lodged by the Municipal Board, Nawa is legally unsustainable and an abuse of the legal process. The disputed patta was originally issued by Jodhpur Maharaj and later lawfully transferred to the petitioner through valid sale deeds. It is further argued that the petitioner applied for a freehold patta under Section 69-A of the Rajasthan Municipality Act, 2009, and after due legal procedure, the Municipal Board issued and registered the patta on 07.02.2024 and 03.04.2024, respectively. As per Order No. P.17(1) NV/Abhiyan/2021 Jaipur, dated 21.04.2022, if the Chairman fails to sign within three days, the Commissioner/Executive Officer can issue the patta, making the forgery allegations baseless. Furthermore, the petitioner possesses a valid chain of title documents and is being falsely implicated due to political motives. As per Order No. P.17(1) NV/Abhiyan/2021 Jaipur, dated 21.04.2022, if the Chairman fails to sign within three days, the Commissioner/Executive Officer can issue the patta, making the forgery allegations baseless. Furthermore, the petitioner possesses a valid chain of title documents and is being falsely implicated due to political motives. The counsel for the petitioner states that the FIR lacks the necessary ingredients of Sections 379, 467, 468, and 471 IPC, and its continuation would result in a miscarriage of justice. Therefore, it is requested to quash the FIR to prevent undue harassment. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor and counsel for the respondents opposed the submissions made by the petitioner. 5. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar by the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the FIR, factual report and other materials made available on record. 6. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted a factual report dated 06.02.2025 for perusal of this Court, as per which, neither allegations regarding theft of the patta have been found nor any irregularities been identified in its issuance. Furthermore, no forged documents have been discovered. 7. In this view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that the patta issued by the Nagar Palika does not fall within the definition of a forge document, nor does the act in question comes within the four corners of committing forgery, therefore, the petitioner cannot be allowed to be persecuted or prosecuted in pursuance of the FIR under challenge. 8. Accordingly, the instant misc. petition is allowed and the FIR No. 243/2024 registered at Police Station Nawa, District Deedwana-Kuchaman and all consequential proceedings initiated in pursuant thereof are hereby quashed and set aside. 9. Stay petition stands disposed of.