SC Dismisses Azam Khan And Other's Plea Against Allahabad HC Order Refusing To Quash FIRs Relating To Maulana Mohammad Ali Jauhar Trust

The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to entertain Samajwadi Party leader Azam Khan's challenge to the Allahabad High Court dismissing a batch of petitions filed by the office-bearers of Rampur's Maulana Mohammad Ali Jauhar Trust, headed by Khan, for quashing of criminal proceedings in cases lodged for alleged land grabbing to expand the premises of the University.Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, for Khan (who is the Chancellor of the Mohammad Ali Jauhar University) and other SLP petitioners told the bench of Justices M. R. Shah and C. T. Ravikumar : "This is an interesting case. After 13 years, FIRs were lodged. Your Lordships will find that the complaints are in the same handwriting. All 26 of the FIRs are verbatim. The first FIR is by a revenue officer and gives the names of all the farmers who have made this allegation that they were coerced into entering into a sale agreement and then forcible possession was taken in 2006 and the university was set up. That is the allegation. After this, there is a separate FIR registered in each of these cases but by the same farmers.They say that 'Former minister Azam Khan and former CO Aley Hasan Khan forcibly got executed sale deeds in favour of the university. Whenever we demanded possession over the land, they threatened us with life'....This is after 13 years that this allegation is being made. This is the allegation. What happened then is that in 2019, they filed eviction proceedings before the revenue Authorities, these very farmers. There, they say they have been deprived of possession in 2019 by the University. They say they are continuously land owners. This was the suit of 2020. They say that the university does not have any concern with the land, that it is Illegally occupied land on the strength of his political standing and there is no legal right. Here, they say the Possession is taken in 2019 but the FIRs in 2019 say that it was taken in 2006. 12 July 2019 is the date of the FIR, time is 2 o’clock in the morning. This was the first FIR by the revenue officer which states, on the basis of the affidavit submitted by the farmers concerned, that the former minister pressured them to execute sale of the said land. In the revenue proceedings, they say that they are land owners and continue to be in cultivation of the land. They say, 'I was taking care of my family by cultivating over my land. At the time of construction of the university, Azam Khan took over my land'. Here, they said they were pressurised to execute the sale deed forcibly in favour of the university and they were threatened to be implicated in false cases of Charas and smack and many times, they were kept in jail for whole days, that every time they asked for their lands back, they were given life threats. 13 years later, they filed an FIR, all of them together. Each allegation becomes a separate FIR of each farmer. In the eviction proceedings, they say the cause of action arose in 2019. We went to the High Court and said these proceedings have to be quashed. Obviously, it is Politically motivated"Justice Shah: "Now these lands are forming part of the university or outside the university?"Mr. Sibal: "three are inside, two outside. Five survey numbers in total"Justice Shah: "whether any sale deeds are executed?"Mr. Sibal: "no"Justice Shah: "then how are they in the premises of the university without any sale deed?"Mr. Sibal: "We have never taken possession of them. There is a boundary wall, there are some third party properties within the boundary wall of the university. They are publicly accessible"Justice Shah: "where is the question of accessible when walls are constructed? It cannot be a public way. It must be a part of the University"Mr. Sibal: "It is a public way. There is Complete access, Anybody can walk. We are not physical possession as such. They said they were cultivating the land till 2019, that we took possession in 2019?"Justice Shah: "That is the subject matter of investigation"Mr. Sibal: "The land is lying vacant, they can take possession. How am I being prosecuted for that? There must be some evidence to show that I took possession"Bench: "That will be investigated"Mr. Sibal: "It cannot be investigated because they said we took possession in 2019 in the eviction proceedings. They said 'I was evicted in 2019, until which I was cultivating the land'. Then they say 'sale deed in 2006'? I am being prosecuted for this? What is the evidence to show that I am in possession?"Bench: "who constructed the compound wall"Mr. Sibal: "Your lordships may record my statement that we are not in possession"Justice Shah: "Record it before the investigating agency. Any other point you want to canvass other than this 2019 point?"Mr. Sibal: "Why 27 FIRs? Why should there be 27 different trials?"Justice Shah: "Because there are 27 persons. If it is a different transaction, then 27 different are possible'Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, for the state: "They have taken possession from all these people....

SC Dismisses Azam Khan And Other's Plea Against Allahabad HC Order Refusing To Quash FIRs Relating To Maulana Mohammad Ali Jauhar Trust

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags