'Musclemen Aided Land Grabbing Has Become Order Of The Day': Madhya Pradesh High Court While Refusing Bail

In a bail matter, the Indore Bench at Madhya Pradesh High Court has observed that land grabbing with the aid of muscleman has become the order of the day at least in Indore, as suggested by a sizeable number of litigation coming to the Court.

Justice Sujoy Paul noted that the actual landowner with a registered sale deed is either dispossessed or not granted the possession of the land with the aid of the land mafia.

Acknowledging the fear amongst people and a sizeable number of unnamed complaints, the Judge observed,

"It appears that land grabbing with the aid of muscleman became order of the day at least at Indore. Sizable number of litigation travelling to this Court in this regard at least suggest that With the aid of muscleman and with the connivance of the office bearers of the society, land is being sold to a third person. Unfortunately, we are witnessing a sizable number of such cases. The nexus of muscleman and key persons involved in such deal is so deep-rooted that normally a common man doesn't dare to prefer a named complaint."

While refusing bail to the applicant, alleged to be one such muscleman, the Court remarked that it is 'not safe' to set him free looking at the criminal record and the lands he has allegedly grabbed in the past.

Matter In Brief

The applicant, elected Vice-Chairman of a housing society in March 2013, claimed that he is not an encroacher; instead, the whole allegation is made against the two other main accused persons. He also highlighted that a Court below, in another similar crime, had granted bail to the applicant. Praying for bail, it was urged that the applicant himself preferred series of complaints and applications under the Municipal Corporation Act against encroachment in the society.

Opposing the grant of bail, Advocate Aditya Garg, for the state-respondent, argued that an authorized colony's land had been diverted by artificially and illegally dividing into two colonies without any documentary basis or any statutory authority.

It was also urged that, 

"In a systematic manner, the applicant connived with the land mafia and co-accused persons thereby land of 'Nyay Nagar Extension' was shown as land of aforesaid two colonies. The said land was sold to new persons by way of notarized documents. Resultantly, the actual owners in whose favour the sale deeds were executed were deprived. By using this modus operandi, a sizable number of complainants were deprived to enjoy the fruits of their lands for which they have registered sale deeds in their favour."

The state-respondents also urged that a large magnitude of complainants have come forward, more than ten specifically taking the name of the present applicant. Furthermore, after the grant of bail by a Court below in another crime, several newer complaints have been received. It was also argued that it is wrongly projected that the applicant has made complaints against illegal encroachments, as he is not a signatory to the said complaints; instead, they were preferred by the society of which the applicant was a Vice-Chairman between 2013-2018.

Findings

While refusing grant of bail, the Court noted that the argument by the respondent-State was not controverted to the extent where it states about creation of two illegal colonies without any permission or statutory authority. It is also stated that the complaints on which heavy reliance is placed by the applicant do not contain any such averment that authorised colony itself is diverted into two illegal separate colonies. Moreover, the complaints were not preferred by the present applicant. The Court noted, 

"If present applicant was Vice Chairman of the Nayay Vibhag Karmachari Grih Nirman Sahakari Sanstha, it was incumbent upon the society and the applicant to take serious objection regarding formation of two illegal societies and selling the plots illegally by way of notarized agreements"

It added,

"If these sizable number of plots were shown in other colony, the minimum expectation was that the Cooperative Society of applicant's will lodge complaint with accuracy and precision before the competent authority. No such complaint is brought to the notice of this Court. The complaints are being preferred on regular basis by the persons, who have been deprived from the fruits of registered sale deed in Nyay Nagar Extension."

The Court noted that it is clear that the investigation will take time; and it is not a fit case for grant of bail. 

Case Title: Nitin v. State of Madhya Pradesh 

Click Here To Download Order 

Read Order