In a recent ruling, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh, through Justice Sanjay Dhar, underscored that the pendency of a criminal case cannot curtail an individual’s property rights. The Court categorically held that “even a criminal has a right to sell his land,” directing the revenue authorities to issue revenue extracts without insisting on unnecessary clearances.

Background:

The matter arose when the petitioner sought to sell his land measuring 2 kanals 17 marlas in Village Kanhal, Tehsil Bishnah, District Jammu. For this purpose, he applied to the Tehsildar of Bishnah for issuance of Fard Intikhab (revenue extracts). Instead of processing the request, the Tehsildar demanded a no-objection certificate (NOC) from the Crime Branch. The demand arose because an FIR (No. 89/2023) under sections 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code(IPC) was still under investigation against the petitioner.

The refusal to issue revenue extracts placed the petitioner in a position where, despite owning the land, he could not exercise his right to transfer it. The grievance, therefore, was not about the merits of the criminal case but about whether property rights could be curtailed merely because of pending criminal proceedings unrelated to the land in question.

The Judgment

Justice Dhar, after perusing the record, noted that the FIR had “nothing to do” with the land sought to be sold. The Court strongly questioned the reasoning of the revenue authorities, observing:

“It is beyond comprehension as to why the concerned Tehsildar is seeking an NOC from the Crime Branch, Jammu before issuing the Fard Intikhab in respect of the land in question,” Justice Dhar remarked.

Emphasizing the distinction between criminal liability and property rights, the Court made it clear that registration of an FIR does not strip a person of ownership rights over immovable property. In unequivocal terms, it declared:

“Even a criminal has a right to sell his land and merely because a case has been registered against the petitioner, the revenue extracts for sale of land cannot be withheld. The action of the respondent is, therefore, not sustainable in law,” the order stated.

Accordingly, the petition was allowed. The Court directed the Tehsildar of Bishnah to consider and decide the petitioner’s application for issuance of Fard Intikhab strictly in accordance with law and in light of its observations.

Importantly, the Court set a time-bound mandate, requiring compliance within seven days of the petitioner furnishing a certified copy of the order.

Case Title: Arun Dev Singh v. UT of J&K & Ors, WP (C) No. 2630/2025