‘Acts perpetrated shocks the conscience of this Court’: Telangana HC flays district collector, quashes FIR against woman  

The court further said: “The District Administration has to be responsible and function within the bounds of law; any overreach would not only be an impediment for efficient and effective administration, but would also erode the faith of citizens in a democratic setup.”

The case stems from a land acquisition dispute and a high court order from November 22, 2023. The high court had previously declared the petitioner, Vanapatla Kavitha, eligible for benefits under the state’s R&R (Rehabilitation and Resettlement) policy and directed authorities to include her name in the list of project-displaced families. Despite this directive, the order was not implemented.

Following the non-compliance, Kavitha filed a contempt case against the district collector, and the state, meanwhile, preferred a writ appeal against the court’s judgment. It was while this contempt case and a pending writ appeal were before the court that the collector’s office initiated criminal proceedings against Kavitha, alleging that she had “misguided” the high court to obtain the benefits illegally. The tahsildar, acting on instructions from the collector and revenue divisional officer (RDO), filed a police complaint, leading to an FIR being registered against Kavitha under Section 420 (cheating) of the Indian Penal Code.

The high court’s ruling strongly condemned this action, stating that the collector, as the “Head of the District Administration”, acted “on his own volition, without any jurisdiction”. The judgment noted that the collector’s actions were “instrumental in driving the office of Tahsildar to address a letter to the SHO requesting to book a case”.

“Office no less than that of District Collector, Head, District Administration, played a pivotal role and is instrumental in initiating the criminal proceedings. It reflects the office of District Collector in poor light. Disrespect for Rule of Law and the orders of this Court, is apparent from the facts and the acts. Acts perpetrated shocks the conscience of this Court, nothing more is to be penned,” the judgment stated. It noted that the official’s actions fulfilled the parameters of a “grave and willful” act that “cannot be condoned”.

The court allowed the criminal petition, thereby quashing the FIR, and expressed its appreciation for the assistance provided by Senior Counsel Avinash Desai, who was appointed as amicus curiae.