In a dispute regarding denial of re-issuance of passport to the illegal occupant of State land and its sale to gullible persons, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir & Ladakh ruled that the moment a person illegally occupies the State land with a view to insult or annoy any person in possession of such property or with an intent to commit an offence, the offence under Section 447-A RPC is complete.
At the same time, the Court clarified that an illegal occupier may be evicted later on, but that does not mean that no offence has been committed by the said person.
Facts of the case:
Pursuant to a complaint received by the Crime Branch, Kashmir, alleging that the petitioner in connivance with land brokers had trespassed the State land and had erecting sign boards and stone blocks and converted the same into plots for sale, an FIR for offences under Section 420, 447-A and 120-B RPC came to be registered. The investigation revealed that the petitioner, with the intention to grab the scattered State land in connivance with the co-accused, had erected sign boards on the State land, which was later on demolished by the Revenue authorities after registration of the FIR. The investigation further revealed that the petitioner had also executed a Power of Attorney in favour of a co-accused, who executed an agreement for sale of 63 kanals of land and had received an amount of Rs.15.00 lacs by way of cheque and an amount of Rs.40.00 lacs in cash in three instalments. It was further revealed that the co-accused had executed a notarized sale agreement for Rs.30.00 lacs from another purchaser.
During the pendency of the petition before the Trial Court regarding illegal occupation of land, the petitioner filed an application seeking a direction from the Regional Passport Officer, Srinagar, as also the official respondents to facilitate re-issuance of a passport in his favour so that he is able to resume his employment in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Finding that the petitioner had proceeded to sell the State land to gullible persons, in lieu whereof he grabbed a huge amount of money, his claim for re-issuance of passport was denied.
Submissions of the Petitioner:
The counsel for petitioner assailed the charge sheet contending that the respondent Investigating Agency has itself admitted that the State land, which was in possession of the petitioner, has been retrieved even before the filing of charge sheet and, therefore, no offence of criminal trespass is made out against the petitioner.
Observations of the Court:
Referring to the revenue records, the Bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar found that the petitioner is shown to be in illegal occupation of State land which was executed in favour of the co-accused, thereby authorising them to sign sale deed, gift deed and to act or do anything with regard to said property.
Finding that money has exchanged hands between the Attorney Holder of the petitioner and some gullible buyers, the Bench noted that the petitioner had a fraudulent intention of dealing in the State land for the purpose of its sale, which attracts the ingredients of an offence under Section 420 RPC.
From perusal of the FIR out of which the impugned challan has arisen, and the dismissal of the petition bearing CRM(M) No.227/2023 on merits, the Single Judge observed that this Court by considering the report of Tehsildar dated Sep 15, 2018, had specifically observed that the land, if occupied by the petitioner, has been retrieved does not absolve him of his alleged illegal action of encroaching it.
The decision of the Court:
For the foregoing reasons, the Court dismissed the petition, leaving it open to the petitioner to approach the trial court for grant of NOC in his favour for the purpose of issuance/renewal of his passport.
Case Title: Mohammad Najeeb Goni vs UT of J&K
Case Number: CRM(M) No.106/2024
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Sanjay Dhar
Counsel for Petitioner: Senior Adv R. A. Jan and Adv Adil Mushtaq
Counsel for Respondent: Senior AAG Mohsin-ul-Showkat Qadiri and Adv Maha Majeed
Picture Source :
