NAI NATWARLAL MOTIRAM Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as "the Atrocity Act" for short) at the instance of the appellant original accused for the anticipatory bail in connection with the FIR being C.R.No. I - 114/2018 registered with Talod Police Station, District: Sabarkantha for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 167, 192, 193, 217, 218, 219, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code, under Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act and Section 3(1)(f), 3(1)(g), 3(1)(p), 3(2)(v), 3(2)(v-a) of the Atrocity Act.

(2.) The short fact of the prosecution is that the FIR has been lodged by one Mr.Chandubhai Motibhai Nadiya on 12.12.2018 on the allegation that there was land which was of their ancestral and there were 23 sharers thereof. That accused No.1 and 2, initially, purchased certain portion of the land and at the instance of the revenue authority, the land was mutated in their names and names of the complainant as well as co-sharers have been removed from the revenue record and, thereafter, the said land was sold to respondents No.3 and 4. That the revenue entry was challenged before the higher authority and, thereafter, the same was quashed and set aside and the matter was remanded back to the Mamlatdar concerned and, thereafter, the Mamlatdar re-certified the same and created false documents. It is alleged that due to action of the Mamlatdar and Talati, false record has been created to defeat their rights and ownership of the disputed land.

(3.) The original complainant respondent No.2 has filed affidavit-in-reply wherein he has stated that the present accused, at the relevant time, was Mamlatdar and he has tempered with the relevant revenue record and with collusion of other accused suppressed the details of past revenue record, moreover twisted it and permitted the other accused to prepare false record and accepted it as true record and considering the prima facie material, custodial interrogation is required and the offence under the Atrocity Act is made out and, therefore, the present appeal may be dismissed.