Justice Delayed and Denied: The Battle Against Inheritance Corruption in Tehsil Lalganj

The sanctity of the law is often measured by how it protects its most vulnerable citizens. However, for Sadhana Tiwari, a daughter seeking her rightful ancestral inheritance in District Mirzapur, the law has become a labyrinth of bureaucratic apathy, police inaction, and systemic corruption.

The case of Sadhana Tiwari—documented through a series of Right to Information (RTI) requests and appeals to the Uttar Pradesh Information Commission—highlights a disturbing trend where revenue officials and police personnel allegedly collude to reclassify criminal acts of fraud as “civil disputes,” thereby shielding perpetrators from justice.

---

The Genesis of the Fraud: A Predeceased Son’s Legacy

To understand the gravity of this case, one must look at the lineage and the Hindu Succession Act. Sadhana Tiwari is the daughter of the late Siya Kant Mishra, who passed away on October 12, 2001. Her grandfather, Shambhu Sharan Mishra, passed away later, in 2005.

Under Indian succession law, as the daughter of a predeceased son, Sadhana is a Class-1 heir. Upon the death of her grandfather, she was legally entitled to the share of the property that would have fallen to her father.

The Exclusion Conspiracy

In 2006, the inheritance process (Varasat) was carried out at Tehsil Lalganj. Despite her status as a primary heir, the revenue records were manipulated to include only her uncles—Daya Shankar, Hari Prasad, and Shiv Shankar—and her grandmother. Sadhana, who was only 10 years old at the time and living with maternal relatives for her safety, was completely excluded.

---

Corruption in Tehsil Lalganj: The Revenue Department’s Role

The exclusion of a legal heir from revenue records (Khatauni) is rarely an “oversight.” In this instance, the appellant alleges a deliberate conspiracy involving the staff at Tehsil Lalganj. By providing “illegal gratification” to revenue officials, the surviving brothers managed to suppress the existence of their niece to usurp the entire ancestral estate.

The appellant rightly points out that the property was not inherited in the name of her deceased father, Siya Kant Mishra, because he died before the grandfather. However, his share should have automatically devolved upon his daughter. The “good faith” defense often used by revenue staff is a thin veil for the rampant corruption that allows powerful family members to silence the claims of orphaned children.

---

Police Inaction: The “Civil Nature” Trap

One of the most frustrating aspects of this case is the response from the Drummond Ganj Police Station and the Circle Officer of Lalganj. In multiple reports submitted via the Jansunwai portal and to the Information Commission, the police have dismissed the matter as being of a “civil nature.

Advice Instead of Action

The Public Information Officer (PIO) and the Station House Officer (SHO) have consistently suggested that the appellant should seek relief in the Tahsildar’s court under Section 34 of the Revenue Code.

Sadhana Tiwari’s rebuttal is poignant and legally sound:

• Criminal Breach of Trust: The intentional concealment of a legal heir to usurp property constitutes “Criminal Breach of Trust” and “Cheating” under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)—formerly IPC Sections 406 and 420.
• Forgery of Public Registers: Concealing names during a legal inheritance process involves the creation of misleading public documents, a serious criminal offense.
• Police as Counselors: The appellant argues that the police are acting as “counselors” by offering legal advice rather than investigating the criminal conspiracy behind the fraudulent revenue entries.

“How has the PIO reached the conclusion that cheating and criminal breach of trust is of a civil nature? They are not jurists; there must not be advice in the report, but action in accordance with the law.” — Sadhana Tiwari

---

The RTI Battle: Incomplete and Misleading Information

The struggle for transparency has been equally grueling. The correspondence reveals that the Uttar Pradesh Information Commission (Court No. S-9) has been involved in overseeing the Second Appeal (A-20241200797).

Despite the Commission’s involvement, the appellant alleges that:

1. Delay Tactics: Critical communications from the SHO Drummond Ganj were withheld until the very date of the hearing (March 20, 2025), preventing a timely rebuttal.
2. Evasive Answers: When asked for the court order that granted her uncles the “title rights” to her share, the PIO admitted no such order exists. Yet, the police refuse to investigate how the property changed hands without such an order.
3. Violation of Human Rights: The systematic denial of property rights to a woman, facilitated by state inaction, is a violation of fundamental human rights.

---

The Path Forward: Seeking Accountability

The case of Sadhana Tiwari is a microcosm of the challenges faced by women in rural Uttar Pradesh regarding land rights. When the revenue department is compromised and the police refuse to recognize the criminal elements of land grabbing, the common citizen is left with no recourse but the higher courts and the Information Commission.

Urgent Requirements for Justice:

• Independent Inquiry: An investigation into the staff of Tehsil Lalganj who processed the 2006 inheritance without verifying the complete family tree (Vansh-Vriksh).
• Registration of FIR: The police must register an FIR for cheating and forgery, as the exclusion of an heir is a documented fact, not a “boundary dispute.
• Restoration of Rights: The revenue records must be corrected to reflect the appellant’s share as a Class-1 heir.

The plea “O God help me” at the end of Sadhana’s representation is a haunting reminder of the desperation felt when every state pillar—from the Tehsil to the Police Station—fails to uphold the law. It is time for the higher authorities in Mirzapur and the Uttar Pradesh Government to step in and ensure that “Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas” includes justice for the daughters of the state.

To assist you in escalating this matter or following up on your RTI appeals, here is a structured directory of the public authorities mentioned in your documents. These details are essential for filing further complaints regarding the alleged corruption in Tehsil Lalganj and the inaction of the local police.

---

1. Uttar Pradesh Information Commission (UPIC)

This is the primary body handling your second appeal regarding the denial of information.

• Presiding Officer: Commissioner, Court No. S-9 (Shakuntala Gautam)
• Address: 7/7A, RTI Bhawan, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh – 226010
• Email: hearingcourts9.upic@up.gov.in
• Official Website: upsic.up.gov.in
• File/Appeal Reference: S09/A/2193/2024 (Appeal No. A-20241200797)

---

2. Mirzapur District Police Authorities

Since you are alleging “Criminal Breach of Trust” and “Cheating,” these are the officers responsible for overseeing the Station House Officer (SHO) of Drummond Ganj.

Authority	Designation	Email Address
SP Mirzapur	Superintendent of Police	spmzr-up@nic.in
ASP Mirzapur	Addl. Superintendent of Police	asp-op.mi@up.gov.in
CO Lalganj	Circle Officer (Lalganj)	N/A (Contact via SP Office)

• Police Helpline: 112 (Emergency)
• Women Helpline: 1090

---

3. Revenue & District Administration (Mirzapur)

Because the core issue is the “Varasat” (Inheritance) fraud at Tehsil Lalganj, the District Magistrate (DM) is the highest authority to whom you can complain about Tehsil staff corruption.

• District Magistrate Mirzapur:
  • Email: dmmir@nic.in
  • Website: mirzapur.nic.in
• Tehsil Lalganj Office: You may address the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM) of Lalganj for a review of the revenue records under the UP Revenue Code.

---

4. Online Grievance Portals (High Priority)

To ensure there is a digital trail of your complaint against the police and revenue staff, use these links:

• Jansunwai (IGRS) UP:jansunwai.up.nic.in
  • Note: Use your existing Registration Number (UPICR20240007679) for reference.
• CM Helpline: Dial 1076 from your mobile to register a complaint directly with the Chief Minister’s office regarding “Police Inaction.

---

5. Summary of Case Identifiers

When sending emails or letters, always include these numbers in the Subject Line so they can track your history:

• RTI Appeal No: A-20241200797
• Diary Number: D-140220250421
• Jansunwai Reference: UPICR20240007679
• Concerned Police Station: Drummond Ganj, Mirzapur
• Concerned Tehsil: Lalganj, Mirzapur

---

Important Reminder on Security

Your personal details (Mobile: 6387233091) and email are now part of the public record in these appeals. Ensure that any future communication regarding “threats to life” mentioned in your RTI (Point 3) is sent to the SP Mirzapur immediately via a “Registered Post with AD” for a physical record.

Would you like me to draft a formal “Letter of Complaint” addressed to the District Magistrate or the SP Mirzapur specifically citing the sections of the BNS (Indian Justice Code) you mentioned?