A Bench of Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah on Monday quashed a criminal case lodged in Ranchi against a group of land purchasers, concluding that the accusations seemed “unbelievable” when compared with the complainant’s own civil suit filed on the same day.
The courtroom mood was strangely tense yet practical advocates traded arguments about forged papers, threats, and caste-based insults, but the judges were focused more on the basic question: Was this a criminal offence or simply a nasty property dispute?
Background
The appellants had bought a piece of land in Kanke, Ranchi first in 2014, and later by a subsequent purchaser in 2020.
The informant, a Scheduled Caste citizen, accused them of grabbing her land by creating fake documents and abusing her using caste-related slurs. The FIR alleged that on 21 January 2022, the accused entered the land and forcefully began building a boundary wall.
But the complainant’s civil suit filed that very same day did not mention any such incident having taken place on 21 January only older disputes from 2020–21.
That inconsistency immediately raised eyebrows in the Supreme Court.
Court’s Observations
The judges sifted through documents sale deeds, a land reforms order, and even a complaint filed by the first appellant alleging extortion threats weeks earlier.
When the Bench looked at everything together, the narrative took a sharp turn.
The bench observed, “The FIR… is a clear abuse of process of law,” noting that the civil suit “does not indicate an incident having occurred as is described” in the criminal complaint.
They remarked that a person already holding registered title to the land cannot be accused of “wrongful dispossession” under Section 3(1)(g) of the SC/ST Act.
The Bench also doubted the allegation of caste-based abuses. To constitute an offence under Section 3(1)(s), such slurs must be used in public view but the FIR did not claim any public witnesses.
In everyday language, the Court essentially said:
You can’t turn a land disagreement into a criminal atrocity case just by adding a few accusations.
They even highlighted that the vendor who sold the land earlier wasn’t named anywhere in the complaint an omission they found suspicious.
Decision
Ending the suspense, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court order that had earlier refused relief to the accused.
“We… quash FIR No.18… and direct that no further proceedings shall be taken by the police,” the Bench ordered.
The appeal was allowed then and there, disposing all pending applications.
Case Title: Amal Kumar & Others vs. The State of Jharkhand & Another
Case Type: SLP (Crl.) No. 5913 of 2025
Date of Judgment: 09 December 2025