The Court emphasized the need for thorough investigation into the allegations of misuse of powers under the Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879 – Appellant’s plea for quashing the FIR rejected but granted anticipatory bail with conditions

The Court held that allegations involving misuse of official position and criminal breach of trust require a full-fledged investigation. At the same time, given the documentary nature of evidence and appellant’s cooperative stance, custodial interrogation was deemed unnecessary, justifying the grant of anticipatory bail.

Appeal for quashing of FIR dismissed – Allegations warranted thorough investigation given the serious misuse of powers and breach of trust (Para 17) Appeal for anticipatory bail allowed – Court found no necessity for custodial interrogation, as allegations hinged on official records and the appellant’s cooperation ensured investigation progress (Para 18-20)

Acts and Sections Discussed:

• Constitution of India, 1950 (COI) – Article 226

• Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 482, Section 438

• Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 409, Section 219, Section 114

• Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879

Subjects: Criminal Breach of Trust – Misuse of Official Position – Anticipatory Bail – Quashing of FIR – Government Land – Revenue Records – Power of Attorney – Delay in Appeal – Custodial Interrogation – Natural Justice

Nature of Litigation: Criminal appeals challenging the High Court’s orders rejecting the quashing of FIR and refusing anticipatory bail

Relief Sought by Appellant: a. Quashing of FIR registered under Sections 409, 219, and 114 IPC b. Grant of anticipatory bail due to alleged malicious intent behind FIR

Reason for Filing the Case: Allegations of undue favor to private parties in restoring government land despite clear violation of legal procedures and allotment conditions

Previous Decisions: a. High Court of Gujarat dismissed the appellant’s plea for quashing FIR (Judgment dated 12.12.2018) b. High Court rejected the appellant’s application for anticipatory bail (Order dated 28.02.2019)

Issues: a. Whether the FIR disclosed cognizable offences warranting a full investigation b. Whether the appellant’s actions constituted criminal breach of trust and misuse of official position c. Whether the allegations warranted custodial interrogation or anticipatory bail

a. Submissions/Arguments by Appellant:

• Appellant acted in his official capacity as District Collector

• FIR motivated by political rivalry and filed after an unexplained delay of four years

• No criminal misconduct as the order was passed in quasi-judicial proceedings

• Allegations of bias and malice unfounded, as actions aligned with principles of natural justice

b. Submissions/Arguments by Respondent (State of Gujarat):

• Appellant misused his official position by condoning an unjustified seven-year delay in appeal

• Appellant passed orders favoring private parties despite their long absence from India

• Orders passed after appellant’s transfer, raising questions of jurisdiction and legitimacy

• Multiple FIRs filed against the appellant for similar allegations of illegal land allotment