Multi-crore shamlat land scam: Court dismisses plea of accused HCS officer

The court observed that Kairon was himself present before the trial court, and he did not claim that he was brought forcibly to the court.

IN ANOTHER blow to Haryana Civil Services (HCS) officer D R Kairon who was arrested from the court premises for his alleged involvement in the multi-crore shamlat land compensation case, a local court in Panchkula has dismissed his revision petition challenging the orders of the Kalka trial court which ordered his arrest on July 15.

The court of Additional District and Sessions judge Rajnish Kumar Sharma on Tuesday dismissed the revision petition, stating that the orders of the trial court were legal and there was no illegality and perversity in the order. Kairon will now remain in judicial custody till August 12, as per orders of the trial court.

Kairon, currently posted as Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM) in Mewat, is one of the six accused in the multi-crore scam for allegedly distributing compensation to private beneficiaries after acquisition of shamlat land in 2011. All six officers were booked for cheating, forgery and criminal conspiracy under sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120 B of the IPC at the Pinjore police station.

[related-post]

Kairon was attending the court proceedings on July 15 when former SDM Vandana Dishodiya appeared before the court and refused to accept the cancellation report by the police, stating that she was not satisfied with the investigation. The trial court then took cognisance of the matter, and directed the police to arrest the accused HCS officer, who was watching the proceedings.

Kairon surrendered before the court, and moved a bail application, which was kept for consideration on July 18. He then moved a revision petition in a higher court in Panchkula, challenging the orders stating that he was a public servant and his arrest without any sanction under Section 197 of the CrPC was bad in the eyes of law. His counsel had argued that the orders were passed in a hasty manner, and since he acted as a public servant, he was fully protected under the Judges Protection Act.

However, the court held that no sanction under Section 197 of the CrPC was required before prosecuting Kairon for commission of offences listed by the trial court, and even though Kairon was working as a revenue officer, he had no right to claim that his official acts were fully protected under the Judges Protection Act.

Citing a Supreme Court judgment, the judge said that the collectors or land acquisition officers were not judges and not entitled to protection under Section 27 of the IPC.

Story continues below this ad

“It is axiomatic that the trial court passed the order after going through the material on record, statement of witnesses, and complainant, and it has applied its analytical judicious mind to find out that a prima facie case was made out to take cognisance of the offences,” read the judgment.

The court observed that Kairon was himself present before the trial court, and he did not claim that he was brought forcibly to the court.

Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram