[Cites 24, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ku. Rajnandni Mishra vs Neetesh Jain on 31 March, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:25383
1 MCRC-35645-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE B. P. SHARMA
ON THE 31 st OF MARCH, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 35645 of 2024
KU. RAJNANDNI MISHRA
Versus
NEETESH JAIN AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Neeraj Pathak - Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Aditya Jain- Advocate for respondent No. 1.
Shri Jitendra Shrivastava - PL for respondent/State.
ORDER
The present petition has been filed under Section Section 482 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking quashment of the order dated 11.7.2024
passed by the learned ASJ, Katni in CRR No.49/2024 arising out the dated
25.05.2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Katni in UNCR
No. 1885/2022, whereby the learned Revisional Court dismissed the the revision
by affirming the order passed by the trial Court. Pursuant to the order of the trial
Court, FIR No. 321/2024 has been registered at Police Station Sleemnabad,
District Katni.
2. Respondent Nos.1 to 4/complainants are the legal heirs of late
Narendra Jain, who was the owner and in possession of land bearing Survey Nos.
492, 493/2, 494, 500, 501 and 502/2, situated at Bheda Tek, Patwari Halka No.71,
R.I. Circle Saleemnabad, District Katni. After his death on 01.02.2016, the names
of Respondent Nos.1 to 4 were mutated in the revenue records vide Namantran
Panji dated 20.03.2017. Subsequently, M/s Ankit Tracom Private Limited filed an
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:25383
2 MCRC-35645-2024
application dated 10.07.2018 under Section 129 of the M.P. Land Revenue Code,
1959 (MPLRC) seeking demarcation of its land bearing Survey Nos. 432/2, 432/3,
473, 474, 475, 490/1 and 491, which was registered as Case No.278/A-12/2017-
2018. By order dated 20.07.2018, demarcation was directed. The demarcation
team visited the site and submitted its report on 02.08.2018, stating that notices
were issued to all adjoining landowners and that, except Narendra Jain, no other
landowner was present. The report further mentioned that Narendra Jain had
allegedly encroached upon 0.30 hectare of land in Khasra Nos. 490/1 and 491 and
0.01 hectare in Khasra No.475. Based on the said report, the demarcation
proceedings were closed on 21.08.2018.
3. Thereafter, M/s Ankit Tracom Private Limited filed an application
under Section 250 of MPLRC for eviction of Narendra Jain from the alleged
encroached land, which was registered as Case No.4/A-70/2018-19. The case
proceeded ex parte , and an ex parte eviction order was passed against Narendra
Jain on 28.02.2019. According to Respondent Nos.1 to 4, they first received a
notice of dispossession on 02.07.2020, after which they filed a complaint before
the Superintendent of Police, Katni, alleging fraud and collusion between the
private respondents and revenue officials. After obtaining certified copies of the
relevant documents, they filed an appeal before the SDO against the eviction order
along with an application for condonation of delay. However, the application for
condonation of delay was rejected vide order dated 28.11.2020, resulting in
dismissal of the appeal. The said order was subsequently challenged before the
Collector, Katni by way of revision, which was later withdrawn as not
maintainable in view of the amended provisions of MPLRC,1959.
4. The grievance of Respondent Nos.1 to 4 is that the demarcation
proceedings were conducted fraudulently and in collusion with revenue authorities
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:25383
3 MCRC-35645-2024
against a deceased person, without issuing any notice to them, despite the fact that
their names had already been mutated in the revenue records after the death of
Narendra Jain on 01.02.2016. It is alleged that notices were deliberately issued in
the name of the deceased and his presence was falsely recorded during
demarcation, thereby declaring him an encroacher. The subsequent eviction order
was also passed against the deceased person. Aggrieved by the illegal demarcation
proceedings, respondent Nos.1 to 4 filed W.P. No.11015/2021 before the High
Court, which was allowed vide order dated 29.07.2021, directing an enquiry into
the matter and appropriate action against the erring officials after granting an
opportunity of hearing.
5. The present applicant is working as a Patwari and was appointed in
the year 2021 on compassionate grounds after the death of her brother. She
completed her training on 09.03.2022 and was posted as Halka Patwari in Gram
Bheda vide order dated 10.06.2022 passed by the SDO, Bohribandh, District
Katni. Subsequently, the complainants filed an application under Section 156(3)
Cr.P.C. before the learned JMFC, Katni seeking registration of a criminal case.
After recording the statement of the complainant under Section 200 Cr.P.C., the
learned JMFC vide order dated 25.05.2024 directed the concerned SHO of Police
Station Saleemnabad to register an offence. Consequently, Crime No.321/2024
was registered against the applicant and other accused persons for offences under
Sections 166, 167, 182, 193, 197, 198, 199, 200, 208, 209, 218, 219, 420, 467,
468, 471, 120-B and 34 of the IPC. Aggrieved by the order dated 25.05.2024, the
applicant preferred a criminal revision before the 1st Additional Sessions Judge,
Katni, which was dismissed on the ground of maintainability. Hence, the present
petition.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the trial Court failed to
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:25383
4 MCRC-35645-2024
appreciate that no material whatsoever is available against the present applicant,
and without proper application of mind, the learned JMFC directed registration of
an FIR, which amounts to misuse of the process of law.
7. It is further submitted that the alleged acts of fraud in the demarcation
proceedings pertains to the year 2018, whereas the applicant was appointed as
Patwari only in the year 2021 and was posted at the present place thereafter.
Therefore, the applicant had no direct or indirect role in the demarcation
proceedings conducted in the year 2018. Even in the complaint and the statement
recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C., no specific allegation has been made against
the applicant. The applicant was not a member of the demarcation team and had
no involvement in the proceedings.
8. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant is a government
servant, and therefore the protection under Section 197 Cr.P.C. is applicable. In
the absence of prior sanction for prosecution, initiation of criminal proceedings
against the applicant is legally unsustainable. On the aforesaid grounds, it is
prayed that the impugned order dated 11.07.2024 passed by the learned ASJ,
Katni, the order dated 25.05.2024 passed by the learned JMFC, Katni, and the
consequential FIR No.321/2024 registered at Police Station Sleemnabad, District
Katni, be quashed.
9. Upon a comprehensive analysis of the material placed on record,
including the pleadings in the present petition, annexures, and the connected case
record, this Court is of the considered view that the continuation of the criminal
proceedings against the petitioner would amount to abuse of the process of law.
The entire substratum of the prosecution rests upon the demarcation proceedings
conducted in the year 2018. The record clearly reflects that the said proceedings
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:25383
5 MCRC-35645-2024
were carried out by the revenue authorities, and the report dated 02.08.2018 was
prepared in discharge of official functions. There is no material whatsoever to
indicate that the present petitioner had any role in preparation of the said report.
10. It is of considerable significance that the petitioner has not signed any
official or unofficial document relating to the demarcation or mutation
proceedings. The documents forming part of the record do not bear her signatures
nor do they disclose any active participation by the petitioner in the preparation or
execution of the demarcation process. Further, there is no material to demonstrate
that the petitioner had informed or misinformed any authority regarding the death
of late Narendra Jain.
11. It is equally important to note that the petitioner is not beneficiary of
any alleged false information regarding the death of Narendra Jain. The record
does not disclose as to who furnished such information to the revenue authorities,
and in absence of any link connecting the petitioner with such act, fastening
criminal liability upon her would be wholly unsustainable.
12. A significant aspect which cannot be lost sight of is that the incident in
question pertains to the year 2018, whereas, as reflected from the record that the
petitioner was appointed as Patwari only in the year 2021 pursuant to a
compassionate appointment. Thus, on the date of the alleged incident, the said
petitioner was not even in service. The allegation that such petitioner, in the
capacity of a Patwari, was involved in the alleged conspiracy is, therefore,
inherently absurd and untenable, and clearly demonstrates non-application of
mind.
13. The order passed by the learned Magistrate under Section 156(3)
Cr.P.C. directing registration of FIR does not reflect due application of judicial
mind. The Magistrate has failed to examine whether the complaint discloses the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:25383
6 MCRC-35645-2024
essential ingredients of the alleged offences or whether any prima facie material
exists against the petitioner. The order appears to have been passed in a
mechanical manner.
14. In view of the foregoing discussion, this Court is satisfied that the
present case is a fit case for exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The order dated 25.05.2024 passed by the
learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Katni in UNCR No.1885/2022,
subsequently the FIR No.321/2024 registered at Police Station Sleemnabad,
District Katni, along with all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby
quashed against the petitioner only.
No order as to costs.
(B. P. SHARMA)
JUDGE
PG
