2025:JHHC:22499 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.3704 of 2017 Subodh Thakur, S/o Late Hiradhan Thakur, resident of village- Lowadih Samlong, P.O. & P.S. – Namkum, District – Ranchi (Jharkhand) …. … Petitioner Versus The state of Jharkhand through Anti-Corruption Bureau, Ranchi ..... … Opp. Party -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Kirpa Shankar Nanda, Advocate. For the Opp. Party : Mrs. Priya Shrestha, Spl.PP ------ 28/07.08.2025 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State through V.C. 2. This petition has been filed for quashing the order taking cognizance dated 10.10.2006 passed by the Vacation Judge, Ranchi, in Vigilance P.S. Case No.25 of 2000, corresponding to Special Case No.12 of 2000, for the alleged offences registered under Sections 420, 423, 424, 467, 468, 469, 471, 477A, 109, 120B of IPC and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, Vigilance at Ranchi. 3. The facts, giving rise to this application, are that certain land measuring total area of 10.95 acres, appertaining to Khata No. 360, Plot No. 1260 situated at Mouza-Hundru was recorded in record of right as Gairmazurwa Land. Out of the said land measuring 10.95 acres Jamabandi with respect to land measuring 3.12 acres was opened in the name of Chandan Sao S/o Samu Sao and Bharat Sao. Much thereafter, one rent receipt was issued in the year 1968 in 2025:JHHC:22499 favour of Chandan Sao and Bharat Sao, who, subsequently, sold the land to Mahavir Kashi, the then Secretary of Jai Bhawani Cooperative Society in the year 1988-89, whose name was mutated in the records of right by the then Circle Officer Sri J.N. Singh in 1989-90 in Mutation Case No.1631 of 1989-90. Immediately thereafter, the Secretary of Jai Bhawani Cooperative Society sold the land to the Members of the Society. After purchasing the land, the Members of the Society made applications for mutating the land in their favour. Acting upon those applications, mutation cases were registered as 1970/1988-89, 1969/88-89, 2288/89-90, 2291/89-90 and 2405/89-90 and then order was passed for mutating the names of the Members of the Society against the lands purchased by them. Since the land initially had been recorded as Gairmazurwa Land, transfers of said land to different persons were considered to be illegal and, therefore, a case was lodged by the Inspector, Vigilance against several persons including this petitioner on the allegation that all those persons have committed offence of forgery, cheating and misappropriation etc. Upon submission of the charge-sheet, cognizance of the offences as aforesaid was taken against the petitioner vide order dated 10.10.2006, which is under challenge. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the case of the then C.O. Jag Narain Singh has already been quashed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Cr.M.P. No.2648 of 2012 vide order dated 16.04.2013. It is submitted that the petitioner happens to 2025:JHHC:22499 be the Revenue Collector and the C.O. has passed the order of mutation and his case has already been quashed. He further submits that the case of one of the beneficiaries namely Mahavir Kanshi has also been quashed in Cr.M.P. No.715 of 2014 vide order dated 20.11.2015. He further submits that Jag Narain Singh and this petitioner both were named in the FIR. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the State accepts that the cases of Jag Narain Singh and one of the beneficiaries Mahavir Kanshi have already been quashed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Cr.M.P. No.2648 of 2012 and Cr.M.P. No.715 of 2014 respectively. 6. Looking to the said order of the Coordinate Bench, it transpires that the case of the petitioner is fully covered as the forgery has also not been proved against the petitioner in the light of the Judgment in the case of Mohammed Ibrahim and Ors. Vs. State of Bihar and Anr. reported in (2009) 8 SCC 751. 7. As such, the entire criminal proceeding, so far as the petitioner is concerned arising out of the order taking cognizance dated 10.10.2006 passed by the Vacation Judge, Ranchi, in Vigilance P.S. Case No.25 of 2000, corresponding to Special Case No.12 of 2000, is hereby quashed. 8. This petition is allowed and disposed of. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) R.Kumar