Bharat Mahadeo Kuvalekar vs. State Of Maharashtra And Anr

Held

The Court held that the petitioner had failed to establish settled possession of the suit premises. The reasoning was based on the petitioner's inability to produce documentary evidence, such as registration under the Shop & Establishment Act or a GST number, to substantiate his claim of settled possession. In the absence of such material, the Court found no sufficient basis to infer settled possession. The ratio decidendi is that claims of settled possession, especially when challenged in a criminal context involving trespass, require documentary corroboration. The Court dismissed the writ petition but granted the petitioner liberty to apply for discharge if he so desired.

Facts

The petitioner, Bharat Mahadeo Kuvalekar, filed a writ petition seeking to quash FIR No. 7 of 2021, registered for an offense under Section 447 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution's case alleged that the petitioner had trespassed into the suit premises. The petitioner contended that he was in long-standing settled possession of the premises, carrying on a laundry business and an agricultural goods business. However, when asked to produce documentary evidence to support his claim of settled possession, such as registration under the Shop & Establishment Act or a GST number, the petitioner was unable to do so. The Court noted the absence of any document to infer the petitioner's settled possession.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner has established settled possession of the suit premises, which is a question of fact and law, particularly in light of the alleged offense under Section 447 of the Indian Penal Code. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that he was in long-standing settled possession of the suit premises, where he conducted a laundry business and an agricultural goods business. Revenue's contention: The State and its authorities did not explicitly record arguments in the judgment. However, the Court's questioning of the petitioner regarding documentary evidence implies the State's likely position that settled possession requires substantiation through official registrations like Shop & Establishment Act registration or a GST number.