Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court

Supreme Court Directs Police Personnel to Pay Rs. 6 Lakhs for Misconduct in Property Demolition Case”

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court of India today directed six police personnel to pay a total of Rs. 6 lakhs as a part of costs in a case involving the illegal demolition of a property and subsequent police misconduct. The bench, comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma, passed this order in a series of connected Special Leave Petitions (SLP).

The case, titled Shatrughna Atmaram Patil & Ors. Vs. Vinod Dodhu Chaudhary & Anr., and connected petitions, revolved around the illegal demolition of a property following the suicide of its owner, Rajeev Ramrao Chavan. The tenants, Vijaykumar Vishwanath Dhawale and Vinod Dodhu Chaudhary, who lodged complaints against the demolition, alleged police misconduct.

The judgment highlighted the role of police personnel in the illegal detention of the tenants and their coercion to sign documents vacating the premises. Justice Vikram Nath observed, “What we are not satisfied with is why the police personnel have been allowed to go scot-free in a case where they had an apparent role in conspiring and in abetting the crime.”

The court’s directive mandates that the police personnel deposit the amount in the Armed Forces Battle Casualties Welfare Fund within four weeks and provide proof of deposit. This instruction follows a settlement in which the accused paid Rs. 10 lakhs to each of the tenants, leading to the withdrawal of their complaints. The proceedings arising out of the two criminal complaints under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, shall be quashed upon the deposit of the said amount.

The bench also clarified that the observations made and the direction for compensation by the police personnel should not be treated adversely in consideration of their promotions or service records.

 Date of Decision: 30th January 2024

SHATRUGHNA ATMARAM PATIL & ORS. VS VINOD DODHU CHAUDHARY & ANR.

 

Latest Legal News