SEEMA LUTHRA Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner herein seeks quashing of FIR No. 148 of 2013 of 12.12.2013 registered at Police Station, Dharampur, District Solan, H.P., under Sections 420 and 120B, IPC and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

(2.) THE allegations against the petitioner as comprised in the FIR is of hers despite not being an agriculturist in the State of Himachal Pradesh, having fraudulently obtained an agriculturist certificate from the revenue agency concerned. The agriculturist certificate is comprised in Annexure P -4. She in sequel thereof purchased property under sale deed comprised in Annexure P -5. In the FIR, it is alleged that though the petitioner herein claims herself to be a legatee under the Will of one late Shri Surjeet Singh alias Jatinder Kumar, her brother -in -law which was executed in the year 1987, yet on attestation of mutation No. 178 sanctioned in the year 1999, the entire land of deceased testator Surjeet Singh alias Jatinder Kumar came to be mutated in the name of his legal heirs. Hence, the petitioner herein was driven to institute a civil suit for declaration for setting aside mutation No. 178 sanctioned in the year 1999, whereby in derogation to the conferment upon the petitioner herein of 1/4 share in the property of the deceased testator, the entire property of the deceased testator was mutated in favour of his legal heirs. Even though, the suit was decreed, however, the FIR records that the decree is collusive and does not have the effect of rendering the petitioner herein to be construable to be an agriculturist, besides with the factum of the petitioner herein having purportedly acquired a right in the land/estate of deceased testator Surjeet Singh alias Jatinder Kumar under the testamentary disposition of the latter, yet the decree of the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction having been rendered in the year 2008, as such then investing a right in the petitioner herein to claim in consonance with the testamentary disposition of her brother -in -law since deceased, in sequel, with the provisions of Section 118 of the Himachal Pradesh Tenancy and Land Reforms Act, 1972, the relevant portion whereof stand extracted hereinafter, creating a bar/embargo in the year 1995 against the transfer of land by a decree of a Civil Court of competent jurisdiction or by way of Will in favour of a person, who is not an agriculturist as the respondent contend the petitioner herein to be so, the acquisition of title by the petitioner herein under a purported collusive decree of the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction rendered in the year, 2008 would lead to no other conclusion than that of the decree of the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction creating or investing no right in the petitioner herein to claim herself to be an agriculturist. On anvil thereof, it is contended that the petitioner herein was not entitled to obtain an agriculturist certificate comprised in Annexure P -4 issued in the year, 2012, as such, it is contended that the same is fraudulently obtained by the petitioner. The relevant portion of Section 118 of the Himachal Pradesh Tenancy and Land Reforms Act reads as under:

(3.) THE gravamen and import of the decision whose relevant portion has been extracted hereinabove is that this Court would be competent to quash an FIR only in the event where the FIR does not disclose any offence or is frivolous, fictitious and oppressive. The determinant fact for reaching a conclusion whether any offence is constituted by the allegations leveled against the petitioner herein in the FIR lodged against her, is whether the agriculturist certificate obtained by the petitioner herein comprised in Annexure P -4, was fraudulently or dishonestly obtained. It would be sufficient for this Court to construe that it was dishonestly and fraudulently obtained in the event of the petitioner herein not having demonstrated before this Court by cogent material that she on the demise of her brother -in -law, namely, Surjeet Singh alias Jatinder Kumar in the year 1989, who had under his testamentary disposition executed in the year 1987 bestowed upon her a 1/4 share in his estate had then no right to seek its alienation or transfer in her favour. The legatees under the Will or the legal representatives of the deceased testator, namely, Surjeet Singh alias Jatinder Kumar have not contested the factum of the validity of the testamentary disposition of the latter. Therefore, an apt conclusion is that the testamentary disposition of the deceased testator Surjit Singh alias Jatinder Kumar is to be concluded to be duly and validly executed. The anvil of the prosecution case, at this stage, against the petitioner herein is that with the coming into force of the amendment to the provisions of Section 118 of the Himachal Pradesh Tenancy and Land Reforms Act in the year 1995 the decree of a civil Court of competent jurisdiction rendered in the year 2008 whereby the petitioner herein was declared to be in consonance with the testamentary disposition of brother -in -law of the petitioner herein, namely, Surjeet Singh alias Jatinder Kumar entitled to a 1/4 share in his estate, attracts the bar envisaged under Section 118 of the Himachal Pradesh Tenancy and Land Reforms Act, inasmuch as with the transfer of land to the petitioner herein having occurred or taken place, hence, by a decree of a Civil court of competent jurisdiction subsequent to the year, 1995, when the amendment in the relevant provisions of the Himachal Pradesh Tenancy and Land Reforms Act came into force and the acquisition of title to the estate of the legator under a decree of the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction, as such, then constituting transfer of the land of the brother -in -law of the petitioner/deceased testator Surjeet Singh alias Jatinder Kumar in favour of the petitioner herein under a decree of a Civil Court of competent jurisdiction constitutes an infraction by the relevant provisions of the Himachal Pradesh in Tenancy and Land Reforms Act with the concomitant effect of rendering invalid the issuance of an agriculturist certificate in her favour by the revenue agency concerned.