Despite order, cops yet to book men who grabbed widow’s land

CHENNAI: For S Jayalakshmi (75), it has been an uphill battle to get an FIR registered in a land-grab case, despite authorities granting a specific direction in her favour.
In her complaint, Jayalakshmi of Banjara Hills in Hyderabad said her husband M Sarangapani died in 2009. A plot of land measuring 2.53 acres in Chettipunyam village in Kancheepuram, partitioned among his family members, was now being occupied illegally.
Following a petition before the Kancheepuram district revenue officer, patta for the land — fraudulently obtained by three men — was restored in favour of the original owner in July 2010.
Legal opinion was obtained from G Venkatesan, deputy director of prosecution, whose October 2011 report said the sub-inspector, district crime branch (DCB), Kancheepuram, “has no option but to register a case of land-grab” against the offenders.
His report said V Narayanasamy and G Annadurai of the same village obtained a patta using fake documents in 2000. Narayanasamy gave a power of attorney to Annadurai who sold it to Dhanasekar. The latter obtained a mining lease to operate a stone crushing unit there.
Jayalakshmi filed a petition before the DRO. Since the DRO cancelled the patta, this would deem the licence for the crushing unit invalid since one had to be a pattadar or lessee to be eligible for a licence under the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules.
The legal opinion report furnished emphasized that a case be registered against Dhanasekar and Annadurai for forgery, document fabrication, cheating, criminal conspiracy and trespass. The third person, Narayanasamy, had died.
In a number of cases, the Madras high court has held it mandatory for a police officer — to whom information about commission of a cognizable offence is given — to record it in the prescribed register. The Supreme Court has ruled that several disputes of civil nature which may contain ingredients of criminal offence should be treated as criminal offences.