Case Note & Summary
The matter concerned a criminal application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 filed by Varsha Thakur, a Deputy Collector/Sub-Divisional Magistrate, seeking quashing of FIR M.A.No.1/2007 registered at Soygaon police station for offences under Sections 166, 167, 193, 465, 468, 471 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The dispute arose from a complaint by respondent No.2, Sunil Mishrilal Jain, alleging that after a civil dispute over land purchased from accused Khemraj Jadhav in 1994, the revenue authorities including the Tahsildar, Nayab Tahsildar and Talathi prepared a false panchnama and mutated entry in the 7/12 extract in favour of Jadhav. The applicant, as Deputy Collector, had heard an appeal under Section 247 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code and granted a stay of the mutation entry. Respondent No.2 contended that there was no appealable order, hence the stay was without jurisdiction, and filed a complaint leading to the FIR. The applicant argued that at the relevant time, she was acting as Sub-Divisional Magistrate and the proceeding was a judicial proceeding under Section 237 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, and she was a 'Judge' under Section 2 of the Judges (Protection) Act, 1985, thus entitled to immunity under Section 3. The court analyzed the definitions and the nature of the proceeding, noting that under Section 247 MLRC, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate is empowered to give a definitive judgment, and a summary inquiry under Section 237 is deemed a judicial proceeding. The court held that the applicant squarely fell within the definition of 'Judge' under the Judges Protection Act and had acted in discharge of her official/judicial duty. The court further observed that if the order was erroneous, the remedy lay by way of appeal or revision to the Collector. The application was allowed and the FIR was quashed insofar as it concerned the applicant; the pending connected application was disposed of. Rule was made absolute to that extent.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure – Quashing of FIR – Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Judges (Protection) Act, 1985, Sections 2, 3 – Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966, Sections 237, 247 – Applicant, a Deputy Collector/Sub-Divisional Magistrate, passed stay order in mutation appeal under Section 247 MLRC – Held that the proceeding was judicial under Section 237 MLRC and applicant is a 'Judge' under Section 2 of the Judges Protection Act entitled to immunity from criminal prosecution – FIR under Sections 166, 167, 193, 465, 468, 471, 34 IPC stands quashed – (Paras 8-15).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a Deputy Collector/Sub-Divisional Magistrate acting under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code is a 'Judge' entitled to protection under the Judges (Protection) Act, 1985 and thereby immune from criminal prosecution for acts in judicial capacity.
Final Decision
Application allowed; FIR No. M.A.No.1/2007 quashed insofar as it concerns the applicant. Pending Criminal Application No.6849/2016 disposed of. Rule made absolute to the extent of applicant.
Law Points
- Judge under Section 2 of the Judges (Protection) Act includes Deputy Collector/Sub-Divisional Magistrate acting in judicial proceedings under Section 247 of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code
- Summary inquiry proceedings under Section 237 of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code deemed judicial proceedings
- Judicial officers protected from criminal proceedings for acts done in discharge of official or judicial duty
