The UP Property Usurpation Case reveals a serious situation in which offenders collude with local officials, including the Tehsildar, Nayab Tehsildar, Revenue Inspector, and Lekhpal, to usurp the ancestral property of victim Sadhana Tiwari. This egregious act shows a blatant disregard for the law and individuals’ rights, as these officials, who should maintain order and justice in property matters, instead participate in the unlawful seizure of property. The case highlights systemic corruption that affects ordinary citizens, exposing how vulnerable individuals can fall victim to those in positions of power. Sadhana, like many others, endures significant emotional and financial distress due to this illegal activity, prompting calls for greater accountability and reform within the revenue department to prevent such occurrences in the future and to protect the rights of property owners.

UP Property Usurpation Case: Unmasking the “Civil Nature” Trap in Ancestral Inheritance Forgery

Inheritance laws aim to protect the vulnerable, ensuring that one generation’s legacy passes justly to the next. However, in the corridors of Tehsil Lalganj and the jurisdictions of the Drummond Ganj police, a different story unfolds—one of alleged administrative collusion, criminal breach of trust, and the systemic exclusion of a rightful heir.

The case of Sadhana Tiwari (Grievance No: GOVUP/E/2025/0029301) compellingly showcases how, consequently, corruption can weaponize or paralyze the machinery of the state, ultimately dispossessing a Class-1 heir and, moreover, silencing her by the very officials who swear to uphold the law.

---

UP Property Usurpation Case The Rights of a Predeceased Son’s Daughter

To understand the gravity of the corruption alleged in this case, one must first look at the legal framework of the Hindu Succession Act. The facts are undisputed:

1. Siya Kant Mishra (Father of the appellant) sadly passed away on October 12, 2001.
2. Shambhu Sharan Mishra (Grandfather of the appellant) passed away later, in 2005.

Under the law, Siya Kant Mishra’s legal share in the ancestral property does not vanish merely because he predeceased his father; rather, it devolves directly upon his daughter, Sadhana Tiwari. Consequently, as the daughter of a predeceased son, she is recognized as a Class-1 Heir.

The law dictates that upon the grandfather’s death, the inheritance process should have automatically included the appellant. However, the offenders reportedly manipulated the revenue records at Tehsil Lalganj to exclude her name entirely—a move that the appellant claims they facilitated through “illegal gratification” and “good faith” relationships with the revenue staff.

---

The Anatomy of Corruption: Exploiting Vulnerability (UP Property Usurpation Case)

At the heart of this grievance is a chilling reality: the appellant was only 10 years old when her grandfather passed away. Consequently, this 10-year-old child, being a minor, was entirely incapable of defending her legal interests or monitoring the Virasat (inheritance) proceedings at the Tehsil.

The offenders allegedly recognized this vulnerability. Subsequently, by colluding with the Department of Revenue, they bypassed the mandatory verification of all legal heirs. Moreover, this is not a clerical error; it is a Criminal Breach of Trust. When public servants and relatives conspire to erase a minor’s existence from land records to usurp property, they undeniably transition from a civil disagreement into the realm of organized white-collar crime.

---

The “Civil Nature” Excuse: A Shield for Criminality? (UP Property Usurpation Case)

The most frustrating hurdle for the appellant has been the response from the Drummond Ganj police. In numerous reports, the police have dismissed the matter as being of a “civil nature,” advising the appellant to seek redress in civil court rather than registering a First Information Report (FIR).

This raises a critical question: When does a property matter become criminal?

Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)—formerly the IPC—acts of forgery, cheating, and criminal breach of trust are distinct criminal offenses. (UP Property Usurpation Case)

• Forgery: If records were falsified to show a different family tree.
• Cheating: If someone intentionally misleads the revenue department to gain a financial advantage.
• Criminal Breach of Trust: If someone dishonestly misappropriates the ancestral property, held in trust for all heirs.

By labeling this as “civil,” the police are effectively acting as counselors for the accused rather than investigators for the victim. As noted in the grievance, a Station House Officer (SHO) is not a jurist. Their duty is to investigate whether a cognizable offense has occurred, not to provide legal loopholes for offenders to escape the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).

---

The Failure of Administrative Accountability

The grievance highlights a recurring pattern in the Uttar Pradesh administration: officials engage in a “ping-pong” of responsibility. Despite attaching death certificates, family registers, and revenue records that clearly show the exclusion of the rightful heir, they continue to forward the file without taking decisive action. (UP Property Usurpation Case)

Forwarding a grievance to the Joint Secretary at the Chief Minister’s Secretariat is a step toward visibility, but it is not a substitute for an inquiry. The appellant’s demand is simple and legally sound:

• Notably, how did they manage to complete the inheritance process without the Class-1 heir?
• What due process did the offenders follow to claim the share of the predeceased son, and consequently, how did this impact the overall claims process?
• Why is there no FIR despite evidence of conspiracy and usurpation?

---

A Call for Justice and Institutional Reform (UP Property Usurpation Case)

This case serves as a litmus test for the state government’s often-touted “zero tolerance” policy against corruption. If criminals can rob a Class-1 heir of her birthright while she is a child and deny her an investigation as an adult, then the system has failed.

The Way Forward:

1. Immediate Inquiry: Consequently, an independent investigation into the conduct of the Tehsil Lalganj staff involved in the inheritance filing in 2005 is imperative.
2. Registration of FIR: Consequently, the Drummond Ganj police must promptly register an FIR under relevant sections of the BNS for instances of cheating and forgery.
3. Restoration of Records: Consequently, the Department of Revenue must rectify the land records to accurately reflect the legal share of Sadhana Tiwari.

Justice delayed is justice denied, but justice redirected into a “civil nature” black hole is justice destroyed. The authorities must realize that the appellant is not asking for a favor; she is demanding the return of what the law already says is hers.

To ensure your grievance is effectively followed up, I have compiled the official contact details for the key authorities mentioned in your complaint. (UP Property Usurpation Case)

These authorities are responsible for the Tehsil Lalganj (Revenue), the Drummond Ganj Police (Law & Order), and the Chief Minister’s Secretariat (Monitoring).

---

1. Primary Oversight (Lucknow Secretariat)

This is the office where your grievance (GOVUP/E/2025/0029301) is currently assigned. (UP Property Usurpation Case)

Designation	Name	Contact Number	Email Address
Joint Secretary (CM Office)	Shri Arvind Mohan	0522-2226350	arvind.12574@gov.in
UP CM Helpline	CM Helpline Cell	1076	cmup@nic.in
Jansunwai Portal	Samadhan Support	—	jansunwai-up@gov.in

---

2. District Administration (Mirzapur)

Since Drummond Ganj and Tehsil Lalganj fall under Mirzapur district, these are the officers who can order an inquiry into “illegal gratification” and “criminal breach of trust. (UP Property Usurpation Case)

Authority	Name/Designation	Mobile (CUG)	Email Address
District Magistrate (DM)	Shri Pawan Kumar Gangwar	9454417567	dmmir@nic.in
Superintendent of Police (SP)	Shri Somen Barma	9454400299	spmzr-up@nic.in
ADM (Land & Revenue)	Shri Devendra Pratap Singh	9454416808	adm.lr.mi-up@gov.in
CO Lalganj (Police)	Shri Amar Bahadur	9454401592	co-lalganj.mi@up.gov.in

---

3. Important Web Links & Portal IDs

Use these links to check status or file a “Reminder” if the police continue to report the matter as “civil. (UP Property Usurpation Case)

• UP Jansunwai (Samadhan) Portal: jansunwai.up.nic.in
• UP Bhulekh (Check Land Records): upbhulekh.gov.in
• UP Police Grievance Redressal: uppolice.gov.in

---

Recommended Next Steps (UP Property Usurpation Case)

Since the police have repeatedly labeled this as a civil matter, your next move should be a formal email to the District Magistrate (DM) Mirzapur and Joint Secretary Arvind Mohan with the following subject:

Subject: OBJECTION – Grievance GOVUP/E/2025/0029301 – Demand for Criminal Investigation into Revenue Forgery and Breach of Trust (Not a Civil Dispute)

In this email, clearly state: (UP Property Usurpation Case)

1. Minor Status: You were a minor (10 years old) when the fraud occurred, making this a “vulnerable person” case.
2. BNS/BNSS Sections: Explicitly mention that the exclusion of a Class-1 heir is Cheating (Section 318 BNS) and Forgery of Records (Section 336 BNS), which are criminal, not civil.
3. Revenue Collusion: Demand an inquiry into the specific Lekhpal/Staff at Tehsil Lalganj who processed the Virasat (inheritance) in 2005.

Would you like me to draft this formal follow-up email for you?