Read Time: 10 minutes

Synopsis

In a recent development, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has undertaken a thorough examination of allegations implicating a Civil Judge in collusion with the accused individuals involved in a land-grabbing case.

The matter came before the bench of Justice Pankaj Jain in a petition requesting the transfer of the First Information Report (FIR) filed for various offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) Sections 452, 323, 506, 427, 120-B, 148, and 149.

The petitioner sought to have the case transferred either to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) or to a Special Investigation Team (SIT) overseen by a senior IPS officer capable of taking a comprehensive approach to the investigation.

The case in question revolved around the Guru Nanak Vidya Bhandar Trust, located in Daryaganj, New Delhi, established back in 1924 with the purpose of providing education and having distinguished individuals as trustees. Allegedly, accused parties, Rajinder Kumar, son of Sona Ram, and Sarabjit Singh, son of Hammam Singh, established a fraudulent trust in the name of Guru Nanak Vidya Bhandar Trust, New Delhi, resulting in a dispute over the trust's valuable property, currently valued at over Rs. 100 crores.

An FIR was lodged for offences under Sections 452, 323, 506, 427, 120-B, 148, and 149 of the IPC at the behest of the petitioner-trust's manager against the accused individuals.

The allegations included the forgery of documents by four accused individuals in an attempt to claim ownership of the property, including a certificate purportedly issued under the Cooperative Societies Act. The fraudulent nature of this document became evident as the National Capital Territory (N.C.T.) of Delhi was established in 1991, long after the certificate's supposed issuance.

It was submitted that subsequently, the four individuals had filed a civil suit in the Civil Court, along with applications under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC). While the Civil Judge had initially granted an ad-interim injunction, this application was later dismissed.

In February this year, an intriguing twist emerged in the case when it came to light that a lawyer in Bathinda had obtained two questionable orders from Judge Navreet Kaur in unrelated cases. In these unrelated matters, Judge Kaur allowed advocate Vikas Kumar's applications to summon a senior bank officer and sought the disclosure of the trust's bank accounts. The petitioner trust contended that its account information was being sought, despite having no connection to these cases. Consequently, the high court called upon the judge to provide an explanation for her actions.

The high court noted with concern the shifting stance of the investigating agency as well, especially while the matter was pending before it. It emphasized the gravity of the situation, as the abuse of the legal process was evident, and the offence was not a mere forgery.

To preserve the integrity of the legal system, the high court underscored the need for a thorough and unbiased investigation by an independent agency.

"The involvement of various stakeholders in the system who were excepted to be on the right side of law but were apparently caught on the other is obvious," said the court.

In referring to the case of "State of West Bengal and others vs. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, West Bengal and others," the high court emphasized the obligation of courts to zealously protect the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution, particularly under Article 21, and to maintain the sanctity of the judicial process.

Given the seriousness of the allegations, the misuse of legal processes for illicit purposes, and the inconsistent behavior of the investigating agency, the high court deemed this case warranting a comprehensive independent investigation.

It also cited the Supreme Court's view that no offender should believe they can evade justice, as it tarnishes the reputation of both the investigating agency and the judicial system.

"The present case which started as one of the same species has attained an alarming turn. The abuse of process of law calls for a detailed investigation in the present case so that the trust of the litigants in the system doesn't get eroded. The obtrusion that impinges upon the system needs to be nipped in the bud and the vigil needs to be on the high against any pollutant. Since an attempt has been made to misuse the process of law and to make the legal system a party to the misadventure, it doesn't merely remain an offence of simple forgery. The system can't afford self-inflicted scars and thus a thorough and unimpaired investigation from an independent agency is required

Consequently, the high court directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), referred to as respondent No. 2, to conduct a thorough investigation in the case.

Case Title: Guru Nanak Vidya Bhandar Trust, Daryaganj, New Delhi v. State of Punjab and others