Actual Harm Caused To Public Exchequer Needs To Be Judiciously Examined: SC Restores FIR Alleging Illegal Transfer Of Govt. Land To Private Entities

The bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra observed, “This Court believes that dismissing the case at the preliminary stage, especially when linked to a broader pattern of similar frauds involving government lands as part of a larger conspiracy, risks undermining the integrity of multiple ongoing investigations and judicial processes. Such a decision would be detrimental to the investigation of similar fraudulent schemes against public assets.”

Brief Facts-

An FIR was filed by the former Special Secretary to the Government in the General Administration Department, accusing ten individuals, including respondents Nirjharini Patnaik & others, of conspiring to forge documents to illegally transfer valuable government land to private entities. The charges include Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 477A, 120B, and 34 IPC. The accused allegedly used forged documents like Hata Patas, Ekpadia, and rent receipts to manipulate judicial and revenue records, securing favourable orders in courts to claim ownership of disputed properties.

At the centre of the allegations was a land transaction in Bhubaneshwar, initially leased to Kamala Devi under suspicious circumstances before India's independence. Despite adverse findings on the lease's genuineness, subsequent authorities reinstated it, amidst allegations of document manipulation and improper legal proceedings.

Later, Kishore Chandra Patnaik granted Anup Kumar Dhirsamant another accused a General Power of Attorney to manage the property. It's alleged that this GPA was later tampered with to favour the respondents and other accused persons. Dhirsamant then sold substantial portions of the land to the respondents at undervalued rates without proper scrutiny of the title's legitimacy or the GPA's authenticity.

The Court stated that the High Court's decision to quash the proceedings was based on an incomplete assessment of the facts, which could only be fully unravelled through a detailed trial process.

According to the Court, the nature and extent of the alleged conspiracy, the involvement of the respondents, and the actual harm caused to the public exchequer need to be judiciously examined in a trial setting.

The Court stated that the High Court hastily concluded that there was no evidence to show a meeting of minds between the other accused persons and the respondents however, according to the Court that can only be decided after a thorough examination of evidence and witnesses by the Trial Court.

Accordingly, the Court set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal.

Cause Title: State of Odisha v. Nirjharini Patnaik (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 346)