LAWS(MPH)-2019-7-68

ANITA SINGH TOMAR Vs. STATE OF M. P.

Decided On July 17, 2019
Anita Singh Tomar Appellant
V/S
STATE OF M. P. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these applications filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter called as 'Cr.P.C.'), the applicants have called in question the legality, validity and propriety of the impugned FIR dated 24-04-2019 recorded in Crime No.16/2019 registered in P.S. Economic Offence Wing, Bhopal. On the joint request of the parties, these matters were analogously heard and are decided by this common order.

(2.) The impugned FIR dated 24-04-2019 is registered against the applicant, the then Tehsildar Churhat, District Sidhi wherein mainly six allegations were levelled against her. The allegations are also made 46 accused persons. The case of applicant is that she in the course of her official duty, gave an inspection report in relation to Sidhi Highway because of which compensation to the tune of Rs.7 crore was quantified whereas the correct quantification comes to Rs.80 lacs. It is further alleged that mutation in favour of ineligible persons was carried out by the applicant/Tehsildar and mutation orders were accordingly passed. This act of illegal mutation was done in order to give benefit to the private individuals for getting compensation from Railways in an illegal manner. The mutation have taken place on the basis of unregistered documents, which is totally impermissible as per law.

(3.) Shri Sankalp Kocher, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the crux of allegations against the applicant is that she had misused her official power to pass illegal orders, hence FIR is registered against her and other office bearers and beneficiaries, who have taken advantage of purported transactions in question. Learned counsel urged that the applicant has been made a scapegoat because she took strict action against the Land Mafia and other miscreants, who had left no stone unturned to get the applicant transferred from Churhat, District Sidhi. The said persons were annoyed with the applicant because she initiated anti encroachment drive against such vested interests.