BALRAM Vs. ASWANI KUMAR YADAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IT was alleged that the land was gifted to the temple of Shri Deo Hanumanji in Village Richhai. This land was given by the trustees or Sar-varakar of the temple to Ramesh Kumar in Adhiya. It was alleged that Ramesh Kumar got his name mutated as the owner of the property and thereby committed offence registered under Sections' 420, 467 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code. It is alleged that the non-applicant No. 1 Aswani Kumar, who was serving as Naib-Tehsildar at the relevant time, had also aided and abetted the crime committed by Ramesh Kumar, the main accused. Initially, the non-applicant No. 1 was not made an accused in the case. After the evidence was recorded including that of the non-applicant No. 1 himself, an application under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was filed by the applicant for making the non-applicant No. 1, Aswani Kumar as a co-accused in the case. This application was rejected by the learned Magistrate on merits. It is apparent that the non-applicant No. 1 was exercising his judicial powers under the M. P. Land Revenue Code while passing the order of mutation in favour of Ramesh Kumar. It is now being urged that the very act of passing of the order by the non-applicant No. 1 in favour of Ramesh Kumar amounted to an offence as he had conspired with Ramesh Kumar, the main accused in derogation of the right of the Presiding Deity to get the name of Ramesh Kumar mutated as a Bhumiswami. Apart from this fact, the non-applicant No. 1 himself was the prosecution witness, it is clear that the non-applicant No. 1, Aswani Kumar is protected under the Judges (Protection) Act, 1985 (henceforth 'the Act' ). The definition of a Judge is given in Section 2 of the Act, as follows :-"

(2.) DEFINITION.-- In this Act "judge" means not only every person who is officially designated as a Judge, but also every person-

(3.) ADDITIONAL Protection to Judges.--