Patna High Court
Mantu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The court held that the dispute is purely civil in nature and lacks a prima facie criminal case, warranting dismissal under Section 203 Cr.P.C.
Summary
The petitioner Mantu Kumar filed a criminal complaint alleging that the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) forged a valuation report to misclassify his residential land as agricultural, resulting in inadequate compensation. The trial magistrate dismissed the complaint under Section 203 of the Criminal Procedure Code, deeming the dispute civil. The petitioner appealed through a criminal revision petition, which was also dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, who held that the allegations did not disclose any offence and the matter pertained to compensation. The petitioner challenged this order, asserting that there was sufficient material to show criminal intent and a forged report. The Patna High Court, after hearing the parties, affirmed that the grievance is civil, no prima facie criminal case exists, and therefore dismissed the revision petition.
Issues considered
- Whether a dispute over land acquisition compensation can be pursued as a criminal offence under the Criminal Procedure Code.
- Whether the allegations of forged valuation reports and misclassification of land constitute a cognizable offence.
- Whether Section 203 of the Cr.P.C. is applicable for dismissing the complaint.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 203
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation
- civil vs criminal jurisdiction
- Section 203 CrPC
- NHAI
- forged valuation report
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79421 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1874 Year-2023 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE District-
Patna
======================================================
Mantu Kumar S/o Late Ramchandra Singh Mohalla- New Yarpur Janta Road
GPO, PS- Gardnibagh, Distt- patna Present Address Ramchandranagar
Colony, Hulupur, P.O.- Pakari, P.s.- Beur, Distt.- Patna, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Prabhanshu Shekhar, Project Director, National Highway authority of India
India
3. Sadare Alam, Chief General Manager, National Highway Authority of India,
Office address- Patna House no. D-63, Rajesh Kumar Path, Srikrishnapuri
Patna, Present address National Highway Authority of India, B Block,
ground floor, Shiv Mitra apartment, Vivekanand Marg, Boring Road, Patna
4. Gulam Kadir S/o Jahir Abbas Project Director, National Highway authority
of India B Block Ground floor, shiv mitra apartment, Vivekanand Marg,
Boring Road, Patna
5. District Magistrate, Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, Patna Collectorate patna, P.S.-
Gandhi Maidan, Patna
6. Abdul Wahab Ansari, District Land Acquisition officer, Patna Collectorate,
P.s.- Gandhi Maidan, Distt.- Patna
7. Mohammad Maqsood Alam, SDO, Patna Sadar, Patna Collectorate, P.S.-
Gandhi Maidan, Distt. Patna
8. Vinod Kumar Singh, DCLR, Patna Sadar, Patna Collectorate, Patna, P.S.-
Gandhi Maidan, Distt.- Patna
9. Ashok Kumar Thakur, Registrar, Patna Sadar Patna, Present address-
Chhajjubaag, Registration Office Police Station - Kotwali, Distt.- Patna
10. Mr. Vijay Kant Sinha, Circle Officer, Phulwari Sharif Block , P.S.- Phulwari
Sharif, Distt.- Patna
11. National Highway authority of India, Ministry of Road Transport and
Highways, New Delh India
12. Office incharge M.A. Section Patna High Court, Panta Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 04-05-2026 The petitioner appears in person being the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79421 of 2025(2) dt.04-05-2026
2/6
complainant of this case as the complaint of the petitioner was
dismissed under the provisions under Section 203 of the Cr.P.C.,
the learned Magistrate observed as follows: -
“Therefore, this court on
perusal of case-record and after due
scrutiny of materials brought on record
finds that there are not sufficient
materials on record regarding alleged
offences mentioned in the complaint-
petition, this case is civil in nature and
Bonafide fair of residential land is
involved in this case and an attempt has
been taken to move criminal law into
motion to settle such land disputes, to
make out the prima-facie case against
the persons named in the complaint-
petition. Hence on the light of aforesaid
discussion, it is, hereby, ordered for the
dismissal of the instant complaint-
petition u/s 203 Cr.P.C.)”
2. The petitioner preferred Cr. Revision No. 806/2023
and the same also came to be dismissed by judgment dated
17.07.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge XVII.
The findings, on which the revision petition came to be
dismissed, has been discussed in paragraph nos. ‘18’, ‘19’, ‘20’,
‘21’, ‘22’ and ‘23’ of the revisional order dated 17.07.2025,
which is reproduced herein: -
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79421 of 2025(2) dt.04-05-2026
3/6
“18. Perused the record of
complaint case no. 1874 C / 2023, the
oral as well as documentary evidence
adduced by the complainant during
enquiry. From allegations it appears that
the land bearing plot no. 368
appertaining to khat no. 224 in Mauza -
Nathupur and plot no. 292 appertaining
to khata no. 44 in Mauza belonging to
the complainant, were acquired by the
National Highways Authority of India
(NHAI) for widening N H - 30 (Patna
Buxar four lane) and compensation for
the aforesaid land of complainant was
determined on the basis of a valuation
report dated 23.05.2013 in which the
nature of aforesaid acquired residential
land of complainant was converted into
agricultural land so, no proper
compensation for the aforesaid land was
determined and paid to the complainant
and further in the alleged report dated
23. 05. 2013 the nature of land shown in
some of sale deeds, have been wrongly
stated as agricultural but actually in the
said sale deeds, the nature of land is
mentioned as residential and as such, the
valuation report dated 23.05.2013 is
fake, forged and fabricated and the same
has been prepared in connivance with all
accused persons named in complaint
case. In support of allegation, the
complainant has examined three
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79421 of 2025(2) dt.04-05-2026
4/6
witnesses at inquiry stage apart from his
own statement on S.A. The complainant
has also adduced some documentary
evidence such as sale deeds as well as
the copy of said rate report dated
23.05.2013. On perusal of allegation and
the material available on record it
appears that the dispute arose due to
mentioning the nature of acquired land of
complainant as agricultural in said
report dated 23. 05. 2013 and due to
which the complainant suffered as huge
loss in compensation as he claimed that
his land was residential land. Therefore,
the matter in dispute clearly involves a
question of proper determination of
compensation of acquired land of the
complainant which is purely a civil
nature.
19. Moreover, even if
allegations made in complaint petition is
taken at their face value then also they do
not make out any case against the
accused persons. Further, the complaint
does not disclose the essential
ingredients of any of the offences as
alleged against the accused persons.
From the allegations it appears that this
a purely civil dispute for which no
criminal proceeding can be initiated.
20. In view of aforesaid facts
it is quite clear that the learned
Magistrate has properly applied his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79421 of 2025(2) dt.04-05-2026
5/6
judicial mind on the materials available
on the record to find out whether there is
prima facie case for issuance of the
process against the accused or not.
21. In the light of discussions
made in the foregoing paras, I am of the
considered opinion that there is no error
and illegality in the impugned order.
22. Therefore, within the
ambit of facts discussed supra, I am
unable to appreciate the argument of
learned counsel for the
revisionist/petitioner.
23. After considering the facts
discussed above and carefully scanning
the materials placed on the record, I
reach to the conclusion, that the
impugned order dated 31. 10. 2023 is
proper and legal and hence, it requires
no interference by this Court and
accordingly, this revision petition is
dismissed. Let a copy of this order be
communicated to the concerned Court
and the record of Complaint Case No.
1874 C/2023 be also sent to concerned
Court and further, consign this record to
record room.”
3. The petitioner has challenged the impugned order
on the ground that the same is not tenable in the eye of law as
well as the facts of the case. There are sufficient materials on
record to proceed against the accused persons. The finding that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79421 of 2025(2) dt.04-05-2026
6/6
the case is of civil nature does not appear to be justified as there
is immense criminal intent in it and the learned Magistrate ought
to have taken cognizance against the accused persons on the
basis of ample prima facie material. The report of the concerned
authorities are fake, forged and fabricated and the report dated
23.05.2013 contains false and fabricated sale deed. The
residential land of the complainant has been converted in
agricultural one, and thus, on the basis of forged and fabricated
reports, the claim of the petitioner has also been dismissed in the
arbitration case. Upon query from petitioner, who has appeared
in person, that whether he has accepted the compensation, as
decided by the authorities, in reply, he has submitted that he has
accepted the compensation with objection.
4. Heard the parties and perused the records.
5. Considering the fact that the petitioner has raised a
grievance of civil nature in a criminal complaint proceeding, no
interference in impugned order is required.
6. This application is accordingly dismissed.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
niku/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.