Union Territory Of Jammu And Kashmir vs Brij Bhushan

Non-Reportable

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.12026 of 2024

UNION TERRITORY OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR …PETITIONER

VERSUS

BRIJ BHUSHAN … RESPONDENT

JUDGMENT

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.

1. An F.I.R. was registered under Section 5(2) of

the Jammu and Kashmir Prevention of Corruption

Act, 20061 read with Section 120-B of the Indian

Penal Code, 18602 in the year 2021 with respect to a

transaction in land that occurred in the year 1989.

Signature Not Verified 1 ‘the Act’ Digitally signed by Jayant Kumar Arora 2 ‘the I.P.C.’ Date: 2025.04.07 17:48:51 IST Reason: Page 1 of 10 SLP (Crl.) No.12026 of 2024 The respondent herein who was the Managing

Director of the beneficiary; the J & K Cooperative

Housing Corporation Ltd. (‘JKCHC’, for brevity),

which acquired the subject land after payment of

consideration, was arrayed as one of the accused

alleging offences under the above provisions along

with the Tehsildar and the power of attorney holder

of the lands, alleging criminal conspiracy.

2. The respondent herein successfully filed a

petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure3. The impugned order which quashed the

F.I.R. No. 10 of 2021 is the subject of challenge in

the S.L.P. We have heard learned Counsel Sh.

Pashupathi Nath Razdan appearing for the State

and learned Counsel Sh. Nanu Khera appearing for

the first respondent.

3 ‘the Cr.P.C.’

Page 2 of 10 SLP (Crl.) No.12026 of 2024

3. Suffice it to notice that JKCHC proposed to

acquire 30 kanals and 5 marlas of land in

pursuance of its aims and objects of developing

residential colonies for its members; being the apex

society of the then Union Territory. The JKCHC

applied for certification of the existing right of land

to the Collector Land Acquisition and after

negotiation with the landlords, the subject land was

acquired for Rs. 31,500/- per kanal as per a lease

deed on 10.04.1989 registered with the Sub-

Registrar’s Office, Samba. The land was developed

into various blocks by the JKCHC and allotted to its

members on a ‘first come first served’ basis.

4. In the year 2021, the F.I.R. was registered

alleging that the power of attorney holder landlords

of the subject land had colluded with the Tehsildar

and together with the respondent herein who was

Page 3 of 10 SLP (Crl.) No.12026 of 2024 the Managing Director of the JKCHC obtained ‘fard

Intikhab’ dated 06.04.1989 which had led to the

transfer of the lands in the name of the JKCHC.

The said transaction was alleged to be made in

violation of Section 28(1)(d) and Section 28-A of the

Jammu and Kashmir Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976.

It is alleged in the F.I.R. that this act of the accused

had conferred huge undue benefits to the JKCHC

and its members.

5. The learned Single Judge has detailed the facts

which speaks of the mutation of the land having

been made in the name of seven landlords, which

the State had transferred to them; after it vested in

the State, when the original ownership rights were

extinguished under the Agrarian Reforms Act. The

said persons on whom the land was vested by the

State appointed a power of attorney, who obtained

Page 4 of 10 SLP (Crl.) No.12026 of 2024 the ‘fard Intikhab’ from the Tehsildar leading to the

transfer of the subject lands to the JKCHC.

6. The learned Single Judge also extracted

Sections 28 and 28-A of the Agrarian Reforms Act to

find that any transfer of rights of the land obtained

under that Act, by way of sale, gift, exchange,

mortgage, will or by any other means whatsoever, is

prohibited. In the event of such a transfer, the rights

conferred on the landlord under the Agrarian

Reforms Act vest back in the State. The learned

Single Judge has found that there can be no

criminal proceeding initiated on the basis of a

transfer, which is prohibited under the Act. The

consequence is only of reversion of such rights on

the land to the State Government, which could also

lead to dispossession on reversion ordered by a

Revenue Officer. The learned Single Judge also

Page 5 of 10 SLP (Crl.) No.12026 of 2024 noticed Section 29 of the Act which saves any officer

or authority in respect of anything which is done in

good faith under the Agrarian Reforms Act.

7. We will not go into whether criminal

proceedings would lie under the provisions of the

Prevention of Corruption Act and the I.P.C. as

against the officers, since they are not before us. We

also do not agree with the learned Single Judge that

no criminal proceedings will lie, for reason only of

the statute having not provided it; since the

allegation of corruption and criminal breach of

trust, if substantiated, could lead to conviction

under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the IPC.

The question of indemnity under Section 29; which

operates only if the acts complained of are done in

good faith, would have to be independently agitated

Page 6 of 10 SLP (Crl.) No.12026 of 2024 by the officer of the State who has been arrayed as

accused.

8. Insofar as the party respondent is concerned,

he was the Managing Director of the Cooperative

Society which obtained the lands after verification of

the rights on the land from the Collector of the

District. The acquisition was also for a purpose of

developing the land; which development, it is

admitted has already been completed and allottees

of such lands having raised a residential colony in

the location. Obviously, no action under Section 28-

A has been taken by the State to repossess the

lands. In any event, we do not see any allegation

against the respondent herein under the provisions

on which the F.I.R. has been registered but for a

bland allegation of connivance with the officers of

the State. There is also no personal benefit even

Page 7 of 10 SLP (Crl.) No.12026 of 2024 alleged to have accrued to the party respondent

herein. We find no reason to interfere with the well-

reasoned order of the learned Single Judge of the

High Court.

9. The Special Leave Petition stands dismissed.

10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand

disposed of.

….………..……………, J.

[SUDHANSHU DHULIA]

……………..……………, J.

[K. VINOD CHANDRAN] NEW DELHI;

APRIL 07, 2025.

Page 8 of 10 SLP (Crl.) No.12026 of 2024 ITEM NO.1503 COURT NO.12 SECTION II-C

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 12026/2024 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 29-05-2023 in CRM (M) No. 410/2021 passed by the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Jammu] UNION TERRITORY OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR Petitioner(s) VERSUS BRIJ BHUSHAN Respondent(s) Date : 07-04-2025 This petition was called on for pronouncement of Judgment today.

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pashupathi Nath Razdan, AOR Ms. Maitreyee Jagat Joshi, Adv.

Mr. Astik Gupta, Adv.

Ms. Akanksha Tomar, Adv.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Nonu Khera, Adv.

Mr. Sanjay Chakraborty, Adv.

Mr. Mohan Lal Sharma, AOR

Hon’ble Mr. Justice K. Vinod Chandran

pronounced the non-reportable Judgment of the

Page 9 of 10 SLP (Crl.) No.12026 of 2024 Bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sudhanshu

Dhulia and His Lordship.

The Special Leave Petition is dismissed.

Pending interlocutory application(s), if any,

is/are disposed of.

(JAYANT KUMAR ARORA) (RENU BALA GAMBHIR) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

(Signed non-reportable Judgment is placed on the file)

Page 10 of 10 SLP (Crl.) No.12026 of 2024