Non-Compliance With Rule 14 Of NDPS Rules 2022 Regarding Quantitative Test Vitiates Prosecution Case And Renders Detention Illegal: Allahabad High Court Supreme Court Directs Systematic Audit And Institutional Accountability For Safety In Public Spaces Under Article 21 Extra-Judicial Confession Made Before Police Cannot Solely Sustain Preventive Detention: Supreme Court Pre-Trial Incarceration Cannot Masquerade As Punitive Detention When Trial Is Not Imminent: Supreme Court Land Acquisition | Radial ‘Hub-And-Spoke’ Valuation Models For Contiguous Lands Are Legally Unsustainable: Supreme Court Forfeiture Of Earnest Money Deposit Is A Valid Consequence Upon Failure To Pay Balance Sale Consideration Under IBC Liquidation Process: Supreme Court Res Judicata | Suit For Specific Performance Barred If Relief Was Available In Prior Suit For Permanent Injunction And Not Claimed: Supreme Court RERA | Allottee’s Right To Seek Refund Is Absolute And Unqualified, Not Subject To Promoter’s Completion Of Project: Bombay High Court Order 1 Rule 10(2) CPC | Appellate Court Cannot Summarily Reject Addition Of Legal Heirs Based On Unproven Documents Without Reason: Calcutta High Court Order XIV Rule 5 CPC | Trial Court Must Frame Additional Issues Based On Liberty Granted By Supreme Court To Ensure Just Adjudication: Delhi High Court Mere Citation Of Wrong Provision Does Not Invalidate Order If Court Possessed Jurisdiction: Gujarat High Court Injunction Under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 CPC Cannot Be Granted Over Large Unidentified Tract Of Land Without Establishing Prima Facie Case: Himachal Pradesh High Court Section 125 CrPC | Mere Rejection Of Permanent Alimony Plea In Divorce Proceedings Does Not Bar Claim For Maintenance: Karnataka High Court Section 311 BNSS | Trial Court Has Discretion To Record Evidence In Narrative Form; Accused Cannot Insist On Question-Answer Format: Kerala High Court Section 482 CrPC | Principle Of Parity Cannot Be Invoked To Quash FIR If Allegations Against Accused Are Distinct And Substantiated: Madhya Pradesh High Court Motor Vehicles Act | Tribunal Cannot Grant 'Right Of Recovery' To Insurer Without Evidence Of Policy Violation: Orissa High Court Mere Inadequacy Of Consideration Or Illiteracy Does Not Vitiate Specific Performance Unless Exploitation Is Proved: Madras High Court Contempt Jurisdiction Cannot Be Converted Into Parallel Forum To Enforce Civil Decrees: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 18 Rule 17 CPC | Reopening Evidence At The Stage Of Arguments Without Compelling Grounds Amounts To Abuse Of Process: Telangana High Court Cannot Circumvent Bail Granted By Supreme Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes PITNDPS Preventive Detention Order

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