He bought land in Kashmir. Six years later, someone else was building house on it

But Manzoor had never sold it.

He approached revenue officials for an explanation, but got no response. Finally, he took his complaint to the then Srinagar Deputy Commissioner Syed Abid Rashid, who set up a committee headed by the then Additional Deputy Commissioner K K Sidha.

The inquiry revealed that someone else had “purchased” the property without his (Manzoor’s) knowledge or consent.

The investigation was subsequently taken up by the Jammu and Kashmir Police’s Crime Branch, which found the case extended far beyond Manzoor’s land. It was a widespread land mafia where the same plots of land had allegedly been sold multiple times to different buyers, with revenue officials manipulating land records to facilitate the fraud.

The paper trail

Manzoor had bought three plots in 2012 with his son and sister-in-law. Two plots measured 800 square yards each and the third 425 square yards. Their sale deeds were registered after payment of the official stamp duty, and the land was subsequently mutated in the names of Manzoor’s wife, son and sister.

But 58 days after those mutations were made, they were cancelled. Investigators alleged that Nusrat Aziz, tehsildar of the same city suburb, ordered the cancellation in “connivance” with a broker named Riyaz Ahmad Bhat and other revenue officials.

Bhat, officials claimed, was the one who had sold Manzoor the land.

The cancellation, officials claimed, allowed Bhat to obtain fresh land extracts from the Patwari and sell the property again — this time to two brothers. One kanal was also transferred in Aziz’s name.

Aziz told investigators that she had “purchased” the land from Bhat.

The investigation then uncovered a discrepancy in the revenue records.

Whenever a property is bought or sold and the transaction is recorded through a mutation, the Patwari prepares two copies of the land documents: the Parti-Patwar, kept at the Patwari’s office, and the Parti-Sarkar, sent to the Muhafiz Khana for safekeeping.

The Muhafiz Khana in Srinagar is a centralised revenue record room; it also houses pre-Partition revenue records of both parts of Kashmir.

The plots measured 800 square yards each and the third 425 square yards. (Source: Express Photo)

In Manzoor’s case, the investigation revealed that the mutation document had been changed in the Patwari’s office record but remained unchanged in the Parti-Sarkar. The latter still recorded Manzoor’s family as the original buyers.

Investigators sent the revenue documents for forensic analysis of the signatures: it confirmed that Aziz had signed these documents. Investigators also went through bank statements and call records of the officials and found “certain connections between Bhat and Aziz”.

The mutation cancellation itself was later set aside. A report by the then Srinagar Deputy Commissioner found the order suspicious and directed that the original mutations, based on the registered sale deeds, remain intact.

An investigating officer also said the cancellation was beyond Aziz’s authority.

“She (Aziz) didn’t have the powers or jurisdiction to cancel the mutation,” the officer said. “She was Tehsildar, Settlement, at that time and she could have cancelled the mutation only if the area was under settlement process. But it was not. Moreover, the cancellation could have been only carried out by her superior.”

The Indian Express tried to contact Aziz several times but she was not available for a comment.

More offers

Manzoor, meanwhile, said he had confronted Bhat before filing a complaint.

“When I asked him how my land had been sold, he said he had to give one kanal of land (800 square yards) to the Tehsildar,” he claimed.

Bhat then began offering him alternatives, Manzoor said. Eventually, they settled on two huts being built in Pahalgam.

But that deal too fell apart.

“The huts were under construction… Finally when they came up, he (Bhat) asked for some more time for electric fittings. I said we will do it ourselves. But before the sale was about to be completed, I found that the huts and the land with it are mortgaged with the bank,” Manzoor said.

He claimed Bhat offered them many alternatives and every time they agreed, it turned out to be someone else’s land.

“One day a relative came to visit me and told me he had purchased a parcel of land. I asked him where he had bought it and from whom. When he gave me the location, it was the same land he (Bhat) was selling to us!” Manzoor said.

Bhat had allegedly pulled the same trick with them. “He took money and didn’t give them the land,” Manzoor claimed.

A counter case

About a year after the alleged nexus between Bhat and Aziz came under investigation, Aziz filed an FIR against Manzoor, his son and another person.

She accused them of assaulting her and outraging her modesty.

In her complaint, Aziz claimed she had been informed that some people were tearing down the boundary wall of the land she had purchased from Bhat. She claimed that when she reached the spot and tried to stop them, they allegedly assaulted her.

Police registered an FIR and filed a chargesheet. The court, however, acquitted all three.

The court noted that six witnesses, including Aziz, had been listed, but only she was examined by the prosecution. Her husband and nephew, who were also listed as witnesses, did not appear.

“After considering the entire material on record, considering the facts alleged, accused persons are acquitted of the charge levelled against them… as nothing has been proved against them without any reasonable doubt,” the court said in its order on August 31.

Another complaint, same MO

Before investigators filed a chargesheet against Aziz and other revenue officials in December last year, they came across another complaint involving the same broker and officials.

Investigators said they found similar allegations of forged land records against Aziz, Riyaz and Patwari Ashiq Ali in other cases. In one of them, Aziz and Ali were finally arrested in July 2025 after they went into hiding. Bhat was also arrested. All three are now out on bail.

In a written complaint to the Crime Branch, a woman said she had purchased five kanals and four marlas of land for Rs 88.4 lakh.

She told the investigators that sometime after the purchase, the broker came to her and asked for the revenue documents, saying they needed some correction.

“The woman informed us that she later realised there were insertions in the land revenue documents and the Khasra number of the land had been changed,” investigators said.

The investigation was subsequently taken up by the Jammu and Kashmir Police’s Crime Branch, which found the case extended far beyond Manzoor’s land. (Source: Express Photo)

“It was later revealed that the land she had bought was sold to someone else.”

Investigators said mutation records can’t have any insertions, but the records from Aziz’s office showed insertions between two numbers. “It was like between mutation number 3 and 4, you had another mutation inserted by number 3/1. It is patently illegal,” an investigator said.

Investigators said Aziz, Riyaz and Patwari Ashiq Ali faced similar allegations in other cases. In one, Aziz and Ali were arrested in July 2025 after they went into hiding. Bhat was also arrested. All three are now out on bail.

‘The actual number is more than 30’

Manzoor said he has since collected the names of people he believes were similarly duped.

“I have gathered the names, you can see 13 names in this list,” he said, handing over the document. “The actual number is more than 30.”

Among them are three brothers from Kralpora, Srinagar — Syed Aslam Andrabi, Syed Yahya Andrabi and Syed Shabir Andrabi.

Aslam claimed Bhat owes the family more than Rs 2 crore. “I wanted to sell my house and he offered to get a client for it. The deal was settled,” Aslam said.

He said the client had two shops in a complex being built by Bhat and offered them to Aslam as part-payment, along with the remaining amount due for the house. “I took the documents of the shops and the rest of the money from him (the client) and handed him possession,” Aslam said.

Three years later, Aslam said, he is yet to get the possession of the shops.

Bhat later offered three kanals of land in Pahalgam to settle part of the money he owed. Aslam’s brothers also paid Rs 80 lakh and Rs 50 lakh for land they were offered, he said.

“But he never gave it to us…,” Aslam said.

His brother Shabir, he added, is now fighting for his life at the Tata Institute in Mumbai. “He had sold family’s jewellery for the land offered by Riyaz,” Aslam alleged.

Aslam said he had initially tried to settle the matter without going to the police or courts.

“I too have decided to approach the police and move the court,” he said. “How is the government so lenient with him? He needs to be put behind bars for ruining people’s lives.”

For Manzoor, recovering his own land is no longer the only objective. “Just like the drug mafia, there is this land mafia. They are powerful people,” he said. “My only aim now is to get them punished for what they have done with so many people.”