IBC Moratorium | Criminal Court Cannot Direct Disbursal Of Corporate Debtor's Assets To Complainant Pending CIRP: Supreme Court Section 138 NI Act | Failure To Implead Company As Accused Renders Complaint Fatally Defective; Section 319 CrPC Cannot Be Used To Cure Such Fundamental Defect: Supreme Court 'Last Seen Theory' Alone Cannot Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court Acquits Man In Murder Case 'Every Lawyer Has A Duty To Act Decently': Supreme Court Modifies Suspension Of Advocate For Misconduct In Court Premises Mere Declaration Of 'Transitional Area' Under Article 243-Q(1)(a) Of Constitution Does Not Automatically Convert Rural Area Into Urban Area: Supreme Court Supreme Court Quashes Externment Order, Terms Non-Compliance With Natural Justice A "Travesty Of Constitutional Guarantees" 'Certiorari Is Not Appellate': Supreme Court Rejects Plea In Decades-Old Co-operative Society Membership Dispute Victim Must Authorize Settlement: Supreme Court Rules Informants Cannot Quash Criminal Cases Without Real Victim's Consent State Cannot Pick And Choose: Supreme Court Restores Right To Retrospective Regularisation For Daily Wage Employees Order VI Rule 17 CPC | Amendment of Plaint After Commencement Of Trial Cannot Be Allowed Without Proving Due Diligence: Supreme Court Discrepancy Between Ocular Testimony And Medical Evidence Creates Reasonable Doubt: Supreme Court Order VI Rule 17 & Order VIII Rule 6A CPC | Counter Claim Cannot Be Permitted After Trial Concludes When Party Fails To Pay Court Fees Initially: Supreme Court Nominee Holds Insurance Proceeds In Trust For Legal Heirs; Supreme Court Directs Equitable Distribution Pending Succession Proceedings PC Act | Court Must Impose Statutory Minimum Imprisonment Upon Conviction Under Sections 7 And 13(2): Supreme Court Supreme Court Quashes Corruption Case Against Official Caught In Factional Crossfire Retaliatory Counterblasts Cannot Be Used As Weapons Of Harassment: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Complaint Over Civil Land Dispute Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Court Must Defer Question Of Ad-Valorem Court Fee To Evidence When Possession Status Is Disputed: Supreme Court Minor Shortfall In Earnest Money Deposit Does Not Vitiate Auction Sale If It Causes No Prejudice: Supreme Court 'Flimsy And Untenable': Supreme Court Cancels Bail Of Accused In Gruesome 'Petrol-Burning' Murder Case Parity Is Not A Mechanical Mathematical Formula: Supreme Court Rejects Bail Plea Of Murder Accused Article 142 Constitution of India | Supreme Court May Protect Retiral Benefits Of Employees Whose Caste Certificates Are Invalidated In Exceptional Cases Omission Of CGST Rule 96(10) Applies To All Pending Proceedings: Supreme Court Mere Marking Does Not Prove Contents: Supreme Court Clarifies Evidence Law In Testamentary Proceedings Arbitral Tribunal Under Section 16 Of A&C Act Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Determine Arbitrability Of Claims Including Excepted Matters: Supreme Court Arbitration Agreement Can Be Incorporated Into A Personal Guarantee Through A Composite Transaction: Supreme Court

High Court Quashes Orders, Upholds Right of Property: Vehicle Released on Superdari in Alleged Mining Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh delivered a judgment on 19th July 2023, quashing the orders passed by lower courts and upholding the right of property in a case related to alleged illegal mining. The court, presided over by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Moudgil, released the petitioner’s vehicle on superdari until the conclusion of the trial.

The petitioner, Murali Lal Sharma, had sought the quashing of an order passed by ADJ Nuh on 12.01.2023 and another order passed by JMIC Punhana on 10.11.2022. The petitioner’s vehicle was seized by the officers of the Department of Mines and Geology Gurugram/Nuh, alleging a violation of Haryana Mineral Concession, Stocking, Transportation of Mineral, and Prevention of Illegal Mining Rules, 2012.

In its judgment, the High Court emphasized the principles of natural justice and the right of property, as guaranteed under Article 300A of the Constitution of India. The court stated, “Deprivation of a person’s property without proper procedure could even be an infringement of his right of property.”

The court further highlighted the importance of balance while enforcing environmental laws, stating, “The Rules provide penalties for violations, and respondent authorities should follow prescribed procedures.”

The judgment also took into consideration the lack of evidence and unjust presumptions made by the lower courts. It was noted that the petitioner’s vehicle was allegedly found at the spot of the incident, but there was no direct evidence implicating the petitioner in illegal mining activities.

The court’s decision set aside the orders passed by both the lower courts, asserting that the petitioner’s rights had been infringed upon. The court allowed the release of the vehicle on superdari until the conclusion of the trial, ensuring the preservation of the right of property and adherence to the principles of natural justice.

This judgment reinforces the importance of fair proceedings and adherence to legal procedures when dealing with matters of property rights and alleged violations of environmental laws. It serves as a reminder that the law must be meticulously implemented, striking a balance between preserving the environment and protecting individual rights.

The ruling cited relevant legal precedents, including cases such as Irafan vs. State of Haryana & Anr. And Avi Garg Vs. State of Punjab, highlighting the court’s commitment to upholding justice and equity in similar situations.

 Date of Decision: 19.07.2023

 Murali Lal Sharma  vs State of Haryana & Anr.        

          

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Murali_Lal_Sharma_vs_State_Of_Haryana_And_Another_on_19_July_2023_PH.pdf"]

Latest Legal News