Kerala High Court refuses relief to lawyer accused of illegal possession of land within Kasaragod Fort

The Kerala High Court recently dismissed a lawyer's plea to quash criminal proceedings against him over alleged illegal acquisition of 1.24 acres of government land forming part of the historically significant Kasaragod Fort. [SJ Prasad v State of Kerala].Justice A Badharudeen held that mere reliance on a legal opinion before purchasing a land cannot shield one from prosecution, especially when public records and past judicial findings showed that the land belonged to the government."In fact, the legal opinion has no significance and it is the duty of the petitioner to be beware while purchasing property by tracing the previous title deeds to ensure that the property offered for sale is a property for which the seller has absolute ownership and title," the Court's judgment stated.The Court noted that the land was originally given on a perpetual lease (Mulageni) in 1903 to one Ganappayya by the then Board of Revenue, Madras. After the enactment of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, the land automatically became government property as of January 1, 1970.The Court rejected the lawyer's claim of innocence, particularly emphasising that since he is a practicing lawyer, he should have exercised due diligence before acquiring the land."Since the documents would show that the property owned by the government, for which claim for tenancy was denied by the competent authorities as well as the civil courts, was sold in the name of the petitioner, who is a practicing lawyer. In such a case, it could not be held that the petitioner is innocent in getting transfer of the government land from the other accused, who do not have any title over the same," the Court said.The case stemmed from a 2015 complaint alleging that private individuals, including the petitioner, advocate SJ Prasad, had conspired with revenue officials to illegally take possession of government land in Thalangara village, which includes parts of Kasaragod Fort, a protected and historically significant site. The Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) found that Prasad had purchased the land in 2009 from persons who themselves had no valid title. The VACB found that the purchase was backed by a 'patta' (land ownership certificate) that had been cancelled by the appellate tribunal decades earlier.Proceedings were initiated against Prasad before the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge (Vigilance), and he moved the High Court seeking to quash the same. His primary contention was that he had relied on the legal opinion given by an advocate before buying the land. The advocate was one who had conducted cases before the Land Tribunal and Appellate Tribunal, Prasad contended..However, the High Court held that the argument would not stand in the face of public records showing the land's government ownership.The Court said that while the final report did not expressly allege conspiracy against Prasad, records revealed a coordinated effort between him and the other accused persons to transfer the land illegally.The petition was ultimately dismissed and the trial court was directed to proceed with the case without further delay..Advocate SJ Prasad was represented by Senior Advocate M Ramesh Chander and advocates Bejoy Joseph PJ, Govind G Nair, Balu Tom and Bonny Benny.Senior public prosecutor Rekha S and Special Public Prosecutor Rajesh A appeared for the State and the VACB..[Read Order]