At the Stage of Framing Charge, Presumption Suffices; Suicide Note and Grave Suspicion Enough: Allahabad High Court Refuses to Quash Charge Under Section 306 IPC 173 CrPC | Framing of Charge Marks End of Investigation—Complainant Cannot Reopen Probe Merely by Citing Police Lapses: Bombay High Court Recovery Alone Cannot Prove Guilt: Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Photos, Videos Must Go: Supreme Court Binds Warring Spouses to Clean Up Social Media in Matrimonial Settlement Standard for Bail Under Section 319 CrPC Is Higher Than Framing of Charge, But Short of Conviction: Supreme Court Grants Bail to Accused Summoned Mid-Trial State Cannot Arbitrarily Deny Subsidies to 'New Industrial Units' by Retrospectively Applying Expansion Caps: Supreme Court Companies Act | Offence Under Section 448 Is Covered Under Section 447: Supreme Court Bars Private Complaint Without SFIO Nod “See-To-It” Obligation Is Not A Guarantee Under Indian Law: Supreme Court Clarifies Scope Of Section 126 ICA In IBC Disputes Mere Employment of Litigant’s Relatives in Police or Court Doesn't Prove Judicial Bias: Supreme Court Sets Aside Transfer of Criminal Case Reserved Candidate Availing Relaxed Standards in Prelims Cannot Migrate to General Quota for Cadre Allocation: Supreme Court Mere Vesting Does Not Mean Possession: Supreme Court Rules ULC Proceedings Abated For Failure To Serve Mandatory Notice To Actual Occupants Contempt of Courts Act | Natural Justice in Administrative Action: Supreme Court Directs West Bengal Govt to Re-Adjudicate Teachers' Arrears Claims Live-In Relationship with Married Man Not a ‘Relationship in the Nature of Marriage’ Under Domestic Violence Act: Bombay High Court Applies Supreme Court Guidelines Income Tax Act | Substitution of Shares held as Stock-in-Trade upon Amalgamation constitutes Taxable Business Income if Commercially Realisable: Supreme Court Judges Cannot Enact Their Own Protocols During Bail Hearings: Supreme Court Sets Aside Sweeping Age Determination Directions In POCSO If There Is Knowledge That Injury Is Likely To Cause Death, But No Intention Falls Under Section 304 Part II:  Supreme Court High Court Ignored POCSO’s Statutory Rigour, Committed Grave Error in Granting Bail: Supreme Court Cancels Bail of Gang-Rape Accused Section 22 HSA | Co-Heirs Have Statutory Right of Pre-Emption Even in Urban Property: Punjab & Haryana High Court

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