Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, an advocate, filed a criminal writ petition challenging orders impleading him as an accused in a land fraud case under IPC sections -- The original complaint alleged fraudulent sale of agricultural land without required permissions under the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 -- The petitioner argued that he only provided legal advice to clients and was not involved in document fabrication -- The High Court examined the inquiry report under Section 202 of CrPC and found no prima facie evidence of the petitioner's direct participation in the alleged offences -- Applying legal principles, the Court quashed the proceedings against the petitioner, holding that legal advice alone does not constitute criminal liability under IPC
Headnote
Criminal Law-- Code of criminal Procedure, 1973-- Sections 202 and 319-- Indian Penal Code, 1860-- Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 166 and 34-- Creation of bogus and false extract 7/12 of land-- Defrauding the government by tampering revenue record-- Execution of sale deed by respondents/accused no. 1 to 3 in connivance of accused no.6 who was revenue officer-- Report u/s 202 of CRPC submitted by IO-- Petitioner is a practising lawyer-- Process issued to the petitioner by the court of Ld. Magistrate for impleading as an accused u/s 319 of CRPC-- Aggrieved--Revision filed by the petitioner before session court-- Dismissal of revision-- Aggrieved-- Challenged-- Legal advise given by the petitioner lawyer to accused no. 1 to 3-- Main conspirator/respondent no 3 to 5 were died-- Report u/s 202 of CPRC did not disclose that the petitioner who was legal practisioner was directly involved while preparing false 7/12 extract of land-- No written legal advise given by the petitioner to prepare a false document-- No evidence that the petitioner was present at the time of preparing bogus and false 7/12 extract-- Impugned order of impleading the petitioner as an accused was set aside-- Complaint qua petitioner quashed-- Petition allowed Para-- 12, 15, 16, 17
Premium Content
The Headnote is only available to subscribed members.
Subscribe Now to access key legal points
Issue of Consideration: The Issue of whether criminal proceedings against an advocate for offences under IPC based on legal advice given to clients can be sustained in the absence of prima facie evidence of direct involvement in fraudulent acts
Premium Content
The Issue of Consideration is only available to subscribed members.
Subscribe Now to access critical case issues
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the petition, quashed the criminal proceedings against the petitioner, and set aside the impugned orders dated 23.01.2012 passed in Criminal Revision Application Nos. 139 of 2009 and 140 of 2009
