IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1027 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-684 Year-2023 Thana- BODHGAYA District- Gaya ====================================================== SHIV SHANKAR RAY S/O SRI HARI NARAYAN RAY R/O VILLAGE- LILARI UTTAR TOLA, CHANKI, MEARI BAZAR, P.S- BAGHAIYA, DISTT.- ROHTAS. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, BIHAR PATNA BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, GAYA, DISTT.- GAYA. BIHAR 3. THE SR. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, GAYA, DISTT.- GAYA. EMAIL ID.- ssp-gay-bih@nic.in 4. THE S.D.P.O GAYA SADAR, DISTT.- GAYA. BIHAR 5. THE SHO, BODHGAYA POLICE STATION, GAYA, DISTT.- GAYA. BIHAR 6. THE I.O OF BODH GAYA P.S CASE NO. 684/2023, NAMELY RANJEET KUMAR (SUB INSPECTOR), P.S- BODH GAYA GAYA, BIHAR 7. THE C.O, BODH GAYA, BLOCK, P.S- BODH GAYA, DISTT.- GAYA. BIHAR 8. KAMAL NAYAN KASHYAP, THE C.O (THE AND THEN C.O OF BODH GAYA, BLOCK, P.S- BODH GAYA DISTT.- GAYA, BIHAR. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jeetendra Narayan, Adv. Mr.Dinkar Kumar, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sarvesh Kr. Singh, AAG.13 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 3 28-04-2025 Heard the parties. 2. By way of this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- (i) For quashing of the FIR with respect to the Accused No. 2 (The Petitioner) as the same is violation of standing administrative order/direction duly issued by virtue of Letter. No. Vi0-01-425/07-6211 Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1027 of 2024(3) dt.28-04-2025 2/10 dated 09/06/2008 (Issued By Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Govt. of Bihar) and also by virtue of the issued Letter No. 8,Aa5-24/2021 (Issued By Education Department, Govt. of Bihar) (Annexure P/4, Series). (ii) For issuing direction to the Respondent Nos. 2 to 6, to conduct and conclude due, just& proper inquiry in the light of above standing direction(Annexure P/4, Series), which manifests that without application of mind and gathering mensrea against the Petitioner (The Accused No. 2 in the FIR)/the alleged Erred Officer and without prior following the Ordinance No. 6211 dated 09/06/2008 (Issued from Department of Home, Govt. of Bihar). The Divisional Department Officer's must recuse for registering of criminal case against the Officer/Staff as they are functional hands of the Employer (State Government) and the debauched effect can seen in such vehement registering of criminal cases. (iii) For issuing direction to the Respondent Nos. 3 to 6 to conduct and conclude the investigation/ascertained specific roleof committal of offenceU/s 420 IPC, against the Petitioner (The Accused No. 2), against the lodged FIR Bodh Gaya P.S Case No. 684/2023(Annexure-P/1) in the background of, whether in the mutation proceedings for a Rayati Nature of the Land, The allotted wrong plot number hased on, only Circle-Office-Records, Followed by local Reports tendered by Karmchari/C1, will make criminally accountable to the Circle Officer. 3. The Petitioner was the then Circle Officer, Bodh Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1027 of 2024(3) dt.28-04-2025 3/10 Gaya (Bihar Revenue Service) and recently he is promoted to the rank of Deputy Collector Land Reforms. 4. As per prosecution case, the informant, Kamal Nayan Kashyap, the Circle Officer Bodhgaya has lodged a written complaint bearing Memo No. 1222 dated 22/08/2023 addressed to the SHO, Bodhgaya, mentioning reference no. 4079/Ra dated 21/08/2021 of the office of the Collector, Gaya, and stating therein that a lot of irregularities has been done in doing mutation of the land lying under Mauza Dhanawa, Thana No. 351 within the jurisdiction of Bodhgaya Circle and the informant further alleged that the concerned office/employee, who are responsible for mentioning Khata Khesra number different from the sale deed and recommended for the mutation of the land and accordingly the informant was directed to lodge the FIR against persons including the petitioner. With this allegation, the case was lodged against the four accused persons including the petitioner. 5. On the basis of the Memo No. 1222, the FIR bearing Bodhgaya P.S. Case No. 684/2023 was instituted for the alleged offence under Section U/s 420/34 IPC and the same is pending in the Court of Ld. C.J.M, Gaya. 6. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1027 of 2024(3) dt.28-04-2025 4/10 petitioner that prima facie, the provisions of Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code cannot be attributed against the petitioner with his capacity of disposal of the alleged case in course of his office tenure at Bodh Gaya. He further submits that the basis of the FIR is a letter, bearing Letter No. 4079/Ra dated 21/08/2023 issued by the District Magistrate, Gaya and the genesis of the prosecution case is enumerated in the Committee Report bearing Letter No. 678/Confidential dated 04/02/2022. The Committee, headed by ADM, Gaya comprises of its members as the D.C.L.R. Sherghati, the District Sub-Registrar, Gaya and the Circle Officer, Bodhgaya, who had submitted its report on dated 11/04/2022. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the committee, in haste and without finally deciding or disposing of the matter remanded duly by order dated 21/10/2022 passed in BLT Case No. 251 of 2022 with BLT Case No. 252 of 2022 passed by the The Bihar Land Tribunal, Patna has given its finding and in support of his submission, learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon Paragraph No. 12, 15 and 16 of the order dated 21.10.2022 which reads as under:- 12. This court at this stage does not fell it proper to enter into the merit of the order passed by learned Additional Collector, Gaya under Section 9 of the Act. This court feels it proper that petitioner should Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1027 of 2024(3) dt.28-04-2025 5/10 be directed to file appeal under Section 9 (6) of the Act before the learned Collector, Gaya against the impugned order dated 28.04.2022 passed by learned Additional Collector" 15. The opposite party nos. 5 and 6 have filed petition under Section 9 of Mutation Act during pendency of the Title Suit after having failed in their attempt to get mutation of land in their favour, on the basis of aforesaid Sale deed before the learned Circle Officer in Mutation Case No. 3626R-27 of 2019-20 and Mutation Case No. 3010R-27 of 2019-20. The order passed by the Circle Officer was affirmed in Mutation Appeal No. 100 of 2020-21 and Mutation Appeal No. 101 of 2020-21. "16. The learned Collector, Gaya shall pass final order in the appeal filed by the petitioner under Section 9 (6) of Bihar land Mutation Act in accordance with law after hearing both the parties after considering the observation made above in this order within a period of six month form the date of filing of such appeal. The learned Collector, Gaya shall condone the delay in filing the appeal because the petitioner was availing remedy in this Tribunal. The petitioner shall file the appeal under Section 9 (6) of Bihar Mutation Act within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order" 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the remanded cases were registered under the Appellate Jurisdiction as Jamabandi Cancellation Case No. 40/2022 & Jamabandi Cancellation Case No. 41/2022, which is still pending and the Committee has been constituted with an intent of launching of criminal litigation resulting in the present FIR. 9. The Committee, after perusing the documents available has concluded two issues, first issue of Title between Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1027 of 2024(3) dt.28-04-2025 6/10 the contesting parties, which can be possibly redressed by the court of civil jurisdiction and second Issue of wrong Mutation No. 129/5, created in Mutation Case No. 5580 R27/19-20 and which has been recommended for cancellation. 10. It has further been submitted that the Circle Office is the very first court of law with regard to revenue matter of mutation and it is also contended that the right of wrong mutation number/s, which has duly been adjudicated, delivered by the Circle Officer and the same can be altered/corrected/set-aside from the Appellate Court, the D.C.L.R Court, the A.D.M. Court of revenue up to the Bihar Land Tribunal, Patna in hierarchy and therefore the delivering of the revenue order/s by the petitioner on the application of the applicants of Rayati Land followed by the ground reports prepared at the level of concerned C.I, Anchal Amin & Halka Karmchari, said to be wrong Mutation No. 129/5, created in Mutation Case No. 55RG R27/19-20 after observing due proceedings is not a crime. 11. After conclusion, the aforesaid committee, has submitted its finding report to the Collector, Gaya without asking for any show cause and the petitioner has not prepared the process of carving out of new plots from the old plots in his Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1027 of 2024(3) dt.28-04-2025 7/10 tenure but the petitioner has passed orders respectively in The Mutation Case Nos. 3626R27/2019-20, 3010R27/2019-20 and 5580 R27/19-20, in continuation and with obeying the simultaneously old and new trace maps and only on the basis of integral parts of the office-revenue records only. 12. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that there may be a human error in passing of order's upon Raiyati Lands which are in dispute upon the claim and counter claim of the parties and upon the receipt of reports of Anchal Amin / Circle Inspector but the same cannot amount to commission of criminal offence, as alleged in the FIR. 13. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the parties, for declaring the right, title, interest and lawful possession, have filed the Title Suit bearing T.S No. 155/2021; T.S No. 96/2021 before the Ld. Sub-Judge 2nd, Gaya and the same is being contested there. He further submits that order passed by the then circle officer/petitioner in Mutation Case No. 3626R-27 of 2019-20 and Mutation Case No. 3010R-27 of 2019-20 was also affirmed in Mutation Appeal No. 100 of 2020- 21 which is also apparent from the order of BLT. 14. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further relied upon the State administrative standing directions, issued Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1027 of 2024(3) dt.28-04-2025 8/10 vide letter no. 6211 dated 09/06/2008 issued by the Department of Home, Government of Bihar and letter issued in the Education Department, Govt. of Bihar bearing letter no. 630 dated 06/09/2021 in which there is standing direction that without prior permission, without application of mind and gathering 'mens-rea' against any of alleged erred officer and without prior following the letter No. 6211 dated 09/06/2008 (Issued from Home Department, Govt. of Bihar), the Divisional / Departmental Officer/s must recuse for registering of criminal case against the officers/staff as they are functional hands of the employer i.e. the State Government. 15. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the matter of Statutory Law under Revenue Courts in the mutation cancellation Cases, the A.D.M has no jurisdiction to issue an order of "Jamabandi Kayam Karen" but in the present case, A.D.M. Gaya has ordered in the last paragraph of his order, as "Anchal Adhikari, Bodh Gaya ko adeshd diya jata hai ki avedak Madheshwar Yadav, Pita late Chandradev Yadav evam Savitri Bharti, Pita late Sadhu Yadav ke naam kewala ke anusar Jamabandi kayam karnenge sath he uktadesh ka anupalan prativedan 15 dino ke andar bhejna sunishchit karen". Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1027 of 2024(3) dt.28-04-2025 9/10 16. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the then A.D.M., Gaya, in furtherance of the above order passed without authority has issued a Letter No. 3961 dated 10/08/2023 to S.D.M., Sadar Gaya, S.D.P.O, Bodh Gaya. D.C.L.R., Sadar Gaya and the C.O., Bodh Gaya and directed to give possession of impugned land to his successful litigant namely Madheshwar Yadav in mutation cancellation proceedings. 17. Learned counsel for the petitioner, concluding his arguments has submitted that procedural merit of a mutation case is that the D.C.LR has duly affirmed the order of the petitioner (Mutation Case No. 5580R27/19-20) statutorily to be heard under revisional provision after Appellate adjudication (Mutation Appeal Case No. 100 of 2020-21) but the A.D.M., Gaya has has heard the same issue under Mutation Cancellation vide Mutation Cancellation Case No. 62/2021-22. 18. Learned counsel for the State has supported the FIR and has submitted that the same has rightly been instituted by the informant. 19. I have considered the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 20. The petitioner was the then Circle Officer of Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1027 of 2024(3) dt.28-04-2025 10/10 Bodhgaya and is presently working as Deputy Collector, Land Reforms Department. From the records of the case, it appears that the petitioner has not prepared any chart of the process of carving out of the new plots from the old plot no. 32 and 33. He has exercised his quasi-judicial power in the case and the order has been affirmed by the DCLR, Gaya under the revisional power after Mutation Appeal No. 100 of 2020-21. Moreover, for lodging FIR against the petitioner, the authorities must first find as to whether the petitioner has had any mens-rea or not. 21. For prosecuting a government servant, there is a specific letter of the Government dated 9th of June, 2008 that the FIR can be filed only after taking permission/sanction of the controlling authority of the concerned department which has also not been done in the present case. 22. In view of the above, this application is allowed and the FIR bearing Bodhgaya P.S. Case No. 684 of 2023 is hereby quashed with regard to the petitioner only. Vikas/- (Sandeep Kumar, J) U