Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

Family Dispute Not Grounds for Writ Jurisdiction”: High Court Dismisses Retired Air Commodore’s Plea Against MP Brother

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Judicature at Patna has dismissed a writ application filed by a retired Air Commodore, who alleged misuse of CRPF personnel by his brother, a sitting Member of Parliament, in a family property dispute. Honourable Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Sinha declared, “the petitioner has not been able to make out a case for grant of reliefs, claimed by him, requiring interference by this Court in its extraordinary writ jurisdiction.”

The case centered on the petitioner's claim that he was wrongfully denied access to his ancestral home by CRPF personnel acting under the directions of his brother, respondent no. 7. The petitioner sought the court’s intervention, asserting a violation of his fundamental rights under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution.

In response to the dismissal, the court underscored the existence of alternative civil remedies for property disputes. Justice Sinha noted, “the High Court cannot allow the constitutional jurisdiction to be used for deciding disputes, for which remedies, under the general law, civil or criminal, are available.” The judgment emphasizes that while the High Court’s jurisdiction is wide, it is not an alternative for relief obtainable through a suit or other statutory provisions.

The court further observed that the alleged Interference by CRPF personnel did not constitute a violation of the petitioner’s fundamental rights, stating, “dignity of the petitioner has not been violated/interfered with and/or tarnished either by the CRPF personnel deployed at the residence of respondent no. 7 at Amnour or by respondent no. 7 himself.”

This decision reaffirms the principle that writ jurisdiction is not the appropriate forum for resolving private property disputes that are adequately addressed by civil law procedures. The court’s findings have profound implications for the jurisprudence of property rights and the scope of writ jurisdiction in the context of familial property disputes.

Date of Decision: 03-11-2023

AIR COMMODORE RANDHIR PRATAP VS THE UNION OF INDIA

Latest Legal News