Two FIRs relating to alleged illegal issuance of municipal pattas in 2003 dismissed under Section 528 of BNSS; Court orders immediate release of arrested MLA
In a significant judgment delivered on September 29, 2026, the Rajasthan High Court quashed two First Information Reports (FIRs) registered after a delay of 23 years against Santosh Bansal, former Chairperson of Hanumangarh Nagar Parishad, her husband Ganesh Raj Bansal, a sitting Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA), and others. The FIRs, lodged in September 2026 for alleged offences dating back to 2003, pertained to the purported illegal issuance of municipal pattas (land allotment documents) and were registered at Hanumangarh Junction Police Station.
The Court found the FIRs to be a blatant misuse of the legal process, motivated by political vendetta and aimed at harassment. It highlighted that the complainant, Sandeep Soni, was a habitual litigant with a history of multiple petitions and criminal cases, many of which were dismissed or pending, undermining the bona fides of the complaint. Notably, the complaint failed to demonstrate any personal interest in the land issue, which had been under the knowledge of the District Administration since 2003 with no prior action taken.
The High Court observed that Ganesh Raj Bansal, the sitting MLA, had no official role in the issuance of the pattas in 2003, as he neither held any municipal office nor was involved in the municipal affairs at that time. The Court emphasized that the registration of FIRs after such an extensive delay, without any cogent explanation, amounted to mala fide prosecution and was within the categories of cases warranting quashing as laid down in the landmark Supreme Court judgment in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal.
Further, the Court noted the arrest of the MLA within three days of FIR registration, while leaving the legality of the arrest and any claim for compensation to be examined in appropriate proceedings. It directed the immediate release of Ganesh Raj Bansal if still in custody pursuant to the quashed FIR.
The judgment elaborately discussed the principles governing the registration and quashing of FIRs, relying on precedents including Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra and Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI. It reiterated that while the police have a statutory duty to register FIRs upon disclosure of cognizable offences, courts have inherent powers to quash proceedings manifestly instituted with mala fide intentions or constituting abuse of process.
The Court also referred to multiple writ petitions filed by the complainant, pointing out numerous instances of non-disclosure, false declarations, and abuse of public interest litigation to press personal grievances, further underscoring the motivation behind the criminal proceedings.
In conclusion, the Rajasthan High Court allowed the petitions filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), quashing FIR Nos. 624/2026 and 625/2026 along with all consequential proceedings. The Court underscored the need for the police and investigating agencies to act impartially and uphold constitutional values, warning against being instruments of political vendetta.
This judgment provides an important reaffirmation of the judiciary's role in protecting citizens from malicious prosecution and misuse of the criminal justice system, especially in politically sensitive cases.
Bottom Line:
FIRs registered after 23 years in relation to alleged acts connected with issuance of municipal pattas were quashed under Section 528 BNSS, as the Court found the proceedings to be manifestly mala fide, politically motivated, and an abuse of process of law; mere disclosure of cognizable offence does not permit investigation of a false or manipulated case.
Statutory provision(s):
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 528, Section 175; Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B
Santosh Bansal v. State of Rajasthan, (Raj) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2997755
