E-Paper
SC okays dropping 5 cases over Amaravati land deals
Andhra Pradesh challenged the high court order cutting short an investigation into the Amaravati land case which alleged that a group of private individuals allegedly bought plots of land because they had prior knowledge of the plan to set up the new capital in Amaravati.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday put an end to criminal cases against private buyers of land at Amaravati in Andhra Pradesh, upholding the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh high court in January this year that quashed criminal cases against the purchasers.
Dealing with six appeals filed by the Andhra Pradesh government against the high court judgment, a bench of justices Vineet Saran and Dinesh Maheshwari said: “We are of the opinion that there is no perversity or illegality in the findings recorded by the high court while allowing the petition and quashing the FIRs and the proceedings pursuant thereto.”
In March this year, the Andhra Pradesh challenged the high court order cutting short an investigation into the Amaravati land case which alleged that a group of private individuals allegedly bought plots of land because they had prior knowledge of the plan to set up the new capital in Amaravati. Without disclosing this fact, the buyers purchased land from the sellers and, thus, cheated the sellers, as the value of such lands was likely to increase manifold, the first information report (FIR) against the buyers stated.
The FIR was lodged against several buyers for offences under Sections 420 (cheating), 409 (criminal breach of trust by public servant), 406 (criminal breach of trust) and 120B (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
The complaint was filed in September 2020, nearly six years after the transactions in 2014-15.
The Andhra Pradesh government, represented by senior advocate Dushyant Dave and advocate Mahfooz A Nazki, argued that the investigation in the case was still on as there was possibility of establishing a case under IPC Section 418 (cheating with knowledge of wrongful loss) read with provisions under the Transfer of Property Act.
The government argued that the high court should not have carried out an exercise to examine the facts of the case and incorrectly applied the concept of insider trading, a reference to the high court concluding that insider trading was an offence in the stocks and capital markets and not property deals.
The apex court justified the approach of the high court to delve into facts to ascertain whether a case was made out. “What the high court has examined is as to whether the stated facts of the complaint make out any case of deception or not and thereafter has concluded that no case of constituting offences under Sections 420, 406, 409 and 120B of IPC is made out….without considering the facts of the case, the question as to whether the allegations in the FIR or complaint prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused, cannot be decided,” the two-judge bench ruled
Even the concept of insider trading in property dealings has also been dealt with by the high court and found to be alien to the proceedings under IPC, being a concept related to the trading in company scripts and an offence only under the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992, the bench added. Right to acquire property was held to be a legal and constitutional right by the high court.
