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 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

High Court Upholds Attachment of Land in Disputed Sale: Apprehension of Breach of Peace as Justifiable Ground

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court today dismissed a petition seeking to quash proceedings related to a contentious land dispute in Kurukshetra. The Court upheld the orders passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Pehowa, and the Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra, underlining the importance of maintaining peace in the face of property disputes.

Justice Deepak Gupta, presiding over the case, observed, "In these circumstances, ld. SDM, Ismailabad was not at fault in coming to the conclusion that there was apprehension of breach of peace and tranquility, in respect of possession of the disputed land and so, rightly attached the land."

The dispute revolved around a piece of land sold by petitioner Harjinder Singh to Lakhvinder Kaur (respondent No.3), who further sold it to Balwinder Kaur (respondent No.2). The petitioner challenged the validity of these transactions, alleging fraud and incorrect possession transfer.

The Court's decision comes after a detailed analysis of Sections 145 & 146 of the Criminal Procedure Code, with specific reference to the Supreme Court judgment in Ashok Kumar Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others, 2013. The ruling emphasizes the Magistrate's role in preventing breaches of peace in land disputes and the power to attach disputed property in such cases.

While dismissing the petition, the Court also noted the initiation of partition proceedings, indicating a complex dispute over the actual possession of specific land parcels. The ruling also addressed an application to implead two daughters-in-law of the petitioner, who acquired parts of the disputed land during the proceedings, but this was dismissed as an apparent attempt to delay proceedings.

The decision highlights the judiciary's careful balancing act between legal rights and maintaining public order, setting a precedent for similar property disputes. The dismissal of the petition has led to the vacation of the stay order previously granted, bringing a new phase in this long-standing land dispute.

Date of Decision: 16 December 2023                                                      

HARJINDER SINGH  VS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

 

Latest Legal News