KUMARSINH SANJAYSINH PARMAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed under Sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for regular bail in connection with the FIR being C.R. No. 11196017230233 of 2023 registered with Panigate Police Station, Vadodara City for offences punishable under Ss. 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120B of the IPC.

(2.) Mr. Dharmesh Devnani along with Ms. Akshitaba Solanki, learned advocates for the applicants submitted that the application is moved by the brothers who are sons of Sanjaysinh Parmar where the allegation against them is for the offence under Ss. 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the IPC. Mr. Devnani submitted that the complaint has been filed against the present applicants and the father Sanjaysinh Bachusinh Parmar as accused no.1 and against Shantaben @ Gajaraben Bachubhai Rathod.

(3.) Countering the arguments, Mr. Hardik Mehta, learned APP for the State submitted that the fact of the entries being forged came to the knowledge of the authority concerned and thereafter, land grabbing proceedings have been initiated. It is stated by learned APP that the land in question which is land bearing revenue survey No.541 was not connected with Mahijibhai Zinabhai and his right as an agriculturist or protected tenant was not in connection with the said survey No.541 and further stated that in the year 1951, no such entry was mutated in village form no.7/12 showing Mahijibhai Zinabhai as tenant. The order was passed by the ALT for Mahijibhai Zinabhai after making payment for the sale of the prohibited land. Learned APP submitted that during the meeting, under the the Gujarat Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 2020, the facts were disclosed which had come on record that the entry in connection with revenue survey No.541 was not included in any ALT proceedings in connection with Mahijibhai Zinabhai. Learned APP submitted that even the Pedhinama is false where accused No.4 Shantaben has shown herself as an heir of the deceased Mahijibhai Zinabhai and stated that in total, Rs.39.00 lacs has been usurped by Kumar Sanjaysinh Parmar, against whom, 4 complaints have been filed and other complaints are also filed by the other plot holders. Rs.5.00 lacs has been usurped by Harsh Sanjaysinh Parmar, against whom, 3 complaints have been filed and thus, stated that the bail application may be rejected. Learned APP has also relied upon the report produced by the Police Sub Inspector, Panigate Police Station, Vadodara City.