Syed Ghulam Syedain Rizvi vs State Of U.P. And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 2315 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 87
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 37906 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Syed Ghulam Syedain Rizvi
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- M J Akhtar,Sr. Advocate
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

Heard Sri V.M. Zaidi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri M.J. Akhtar, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of the charge sheet dated 28.09.2020 as well as the proceedings of Session Trial No. 132 of 2020, arising out of Case Crime No. 132 of 2019, under Sections 420,467, 468, 471, 477, 409, 201, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, Police Station Azimnagar, District Rampur, pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 7, Rampur.

F.I.R. No. 0312 of 2019 under Section 3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 and under Sections 120B, 201, 409, 447, 471, 468, 467, 420 I.P.C. came to be registered against the applicant and eight other accused named in theF.I.R. One Imamuddin Quraishi, original resident of Mohalla Asarfabad, Deendayal Road, Kotwali Saadat Ganj, District Lucknow, relinquished his citizenship and left India and went to Pakistan and accepted the citizenship of Pakistan. He had huge chunk of agricultural property of around 86 bighas in Rampur and the said property was declared as enemy property and vested in the Central Government/custodian.

It is said that in the aforesaid land, one Ex-Minister, Sri Azam Khan was setting up a university in the name of Maulana Jauhar University at Rampur as his private university in which his son and wife are also the highest office bearers. As the property was huge chunk of land and appropriate for setting up the university, Mr. Azam Khan who was a very powerful Cabinet Minister in the Government of Uttar Pradesh got the record of this land manipulated and fabricated in order to declare it a Wakf Property.

The property was already vested after it was declared enemy property in the Central Government/custodian. As a design to get the huge chunk of land for setting up of the University, a forged Wakf was created in the name of said Imamuddin Quraishi and he was shown to be resident of Rampur on the basis of forged and fabricated documents. Once the Waqf was created, the land was transferred in the name of the university being set up by Sri Azam Khan.

The incident is of the year 2003, however, no serious investigation was carried out and in the year 2019, a complaint was given in the office of the Director General of Police, Lucknow alleging therein that by forging documents and creating false Wakf, the said huge chunk of land was transferred in favour of the university being set up by Sri Azam Khan. The accused-petitioner is specifically named in the F.I.R. The police after investigating the offence has filed charge sheet for offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 477, 409, 201, 120B I.P.C. and Section 3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 against the petitioner.

Sri Zaidi, learned Senior Counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner was a Class -III employee in Shia Central Wakf Board headed by Waseem Rizvi. He was not in a position to declare the said property as Wakf property. He being a Class III employee could have acted on the pressure of Minister and Chairman of the Wakf, but he is neither beneficiary of the Wakf nor had forged any document in respect of the land in question. He further submits that there is no evidence to suggest that accused-petitioner was involved in any manner in forging the documents. He also submits that the investigation has been improper and has been conducted in a biased manner. The accused-petitioner has been shown to be a accused as well as a witness. He also submits that he has been made witness after he submitted his affidavit to the Investigating Officer pointing out culpability of Sri Azam Khan and Sri Waseem Rizvi in the offence in question. He therefore, submits that since there is no evidence against the accused-petitioner and the accused-petitioner being a Class III employee, he was not in a position to forge the documents as alleged, the charge sheet so far as the accused-petitioner is concerned, may be quashed. He has also submitted that neither the Chairman of Shia Central Wakf Board nor its any member who passed a resolution for transfer this land in favour of Maulana Jauhar University and who were instrumental in passing the resolution for the property in disposing it as Wakf property and appointing Mutwalli are the accused.

On the other hand, Sri Ratnendu Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. submits that the accused-petitioner has been named as witness by the Investigating Officer after receiving his affidavit dated 18.03.2020 and the prosecution may move appropriate application for making him approver before the trial court but it cannot be said that the investigation was improper or conducted in biased manner. He has further submitted that the accused-petitioner was holding improtant position and there is an allegation of forging the documents for declaring the said property as Wakf property. The accused-petitioner was named in the F.I.R. specifically and during the course of investigation, the evidence has come regarding his involvement in commission of offence. He, therefore, submits that merely the accused-petitioner has given an affidavit, he cannot be absolved of the crime committed by him. However, if the prosecution thinks it proper that it would be appropriate to make him approver, the necessary action may be taken. This Court while exercising its power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has to see whether prima facie case is made out against the accused-petitioner or not and whether the criminal proceedings are an abuse of the process of the law and to secure the ends of justice interference of the High Court would be required.

I have considered the submissions advanced by the learned Senior Counsel as well as of the learned A.G.A.

The power of High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is an extra ordinary power which required to be exercised to secure the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of the process of Court. The accused was named in the F.I.R. during the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer has collected the evidence against him, therefore, this Court does not deem it appropriate to quash the charge sheet against the accused-petitioner. It will not be out of place to mention that co-accused had approached this Court by filing several 482 Cr.P.C. petitions which got dismissed vide common judgment and order dated 30.09.2022.

Considering the aforesaid fact that this Court has already dismissed similar petitions, I am of the opinion that there is no ground to grant any indulgence to the accused-petitioner in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Thus, the application is accordingly dismissed.

However, it is open to the accused-petitioner to take recourse to any other remedy at the time of framing of charge and move an appropriate application which shall be considered and decided by the learned trial court by a reasoned order without being prejudiced and influenced by any of the observations made hereinabove.

Order Date :- 23.1.2023

Arun K. Singh