Section 164 CrPC Statement Recorded Without Procedural Safeguards Or 'Cooling-Off' Period Not A Valid Confession: Jharkhand High Court Anticipatory Bail Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Investigation Is At A Nascent Stage If Custodial Interrogation Is Not Indispensable: Telangana High Court Actual Pay Drawn During Last 10 Months Must Be Basis For Pension Calculation, Regardless Of Notional Pay In Parent Bank: Punjab & Haryana High Court Limitation For Redemption Of Usufructuary Mortgage Starts Only When Mortgage Money Is Paid Or Tendered: Allahabad High Court Exclusion Of Natural Heir From Will Not A Suspicious Circumstance If Execution Is Duly Proved: Punjab & Haryana High Court Right To Travel Abroad Is A Basic Human Right; Permission Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Visit Is For 'Social Or Celebratory' Purpose: Andhra Pradesh High Court Citizen Cannot Be Externed Merely For Raising Grievances Against Government Decisions: Bombay High Court Lack Of Opportunity To Cross-Examine Partition Commissioner Does Not Vitiate Final Decree; Report Is Part Of Record: Calcutta High Court Section 27 Evidence Act Recoveries Inadmissible If Police Had Prior Knowledge Of Location Before Recording Disclosure: Delhi High Court Foreigners Act | Burden Of Proof To Establish Citizenship Solely On Proceedee, Never Shifts; Prescription For Parkinson's No Proof Of Mental Illness To Explain Testimony Contradictions: Gauhati High Court Trial Court Erred In Abating Suit While Application To Bring Legal Heirs On Record Was Pending: Gujarat High Court Places Of Worship Act 1991 Not A Shield Against Land Acquisition By State For Public Purpose: Allahabad High Court Unregistered Partition Deed Creating New Rights In Immovable Property Inadmissible In Evidence: Himachal Pradesh High Court Illiteracy No Excuse For Filing False Income Tax Returns, Court Must Presume Culpable Mental State Under Section 278E: Jharkhand High Court Trial Court Must Consider Convenience Of Family & Accused's Right To Assist Counsel While Deciding Jail Shifting Applications: J&K High Court Investigation Substantially Complete, Offence Carries Max 7 Years Jail: Karnataka High Court Grants Bail To Police Officers In Corruption Case Buyer's Knowledge Of Title Defect Doesn't Extinguish Statutory Warranty Of Title Unless Sale Deed Specifically Excludes It: Kerala High Court Madras High Court Sets Aside Appointment Of PAs To Judges, Says Relaxation Of Qualifications Via Circular Violates Article 14 BNSS | Mere Allegation Of Calling Deceased To Spot Not Sufficient To Deny Bail To Woman If Charge Sheet Filed: Orissa High Court Amendment To Rectify Property Description In Agreement To Sell Can Be Allowed At Any Stage Of Specific Performance Suit: Delhi High Court NDPS | Confession Before Police Cannot Be Sole Basis For Prosecution: Telangana High Court Grants Bail No Judicial Sanctity For Adulterous Relationships: J&K High Court Refuses To Quash Abduction FIR Involving Married Woman Habitual Offender Accused Of Brutal Murder Of SC Community Member Denied Bail: Kerala High Court Prosecution Fails To Prove Murder Charge As Recovery Witnesses Turn Hostile: Uttarakhand High Court Acquits Man Acquittal In Criminal Case Based On Benefit Of Doubt Does Not Automatically Absolve Employee From Disciplinary Liability: Madhya Pradesh High Court Punjab & Haryana HC Quashes FIR Against Woman For Dressing Pet Dog As Lord Krishna Personal Laws Cannot Be Used As Shield To Commit Gang Rape Under Garb Of Nikah Halala: Allahabad High Court

Supreme Court Quashes Land Release Orders, Highlights Arbitrary Exercise of Power in Land Acquisition

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Intro: In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India has quashed the release orders of acquired land, emphasizing the arbitrary exercise of power by the State of Haryana. The Court's decision came in response to multiple civil appeals arising from writ petitions challenging the acquisition. The bench, comprising Justices M.R. Shah and C.T. Ravikumar, highlighted the need for the State to consider future development and public interest when acquiring land for residential and commercial purposes. The judgment raises concerns over arbitrary land releases and emphasizes the State's duty to utilize acquired lands for intended purposes.

The Court observed, "The State shall take care in the future and must use the lands acquired for the purpose for which they were acquired, otherwise the object and purpose of acquiring the land will be frustrated." It criticized the State's arbitrary release of lands in favor of influential individuals and highlighted the importance of public interest over individual interests.

The case involved the acquisition of land measuring 46.49 acres in Sector 11, Kurukshetra, by the Haryana Urban Development Authority. The State had released a major chunk of the acquired land in previous cases, leaving only small plots under acquisition. The Court emphasized that while some lands were released, the State failed to utilize the acquired land for the intended residential and commercial development.

Notably, the judgment addressed specific cases where the State refused to release the acquired land. In one case, where the land was already utilized for sewage lines with an investment of approximately Rs. 17 crores, the Court upheld the State's decision not to release the land, highlighting the potential adverse consequences if the release were allowed. Similarly, in another case where the land was required for road widening, the Court held that the State's decision to retain the land for public infrastructure purposes was justified.

The Supreme Court's decision dismissed one appeal while allowing the others. It upheld the High Court's order to release the land in question from acquisition in one case. However, it quashed the release orders in the remaining cases, emphasizing the importance of public interest and the State's responsibility as the guardian of public welfare.

Date of Decision: February 24, 2023

State of Haryana & Ors.   VS Niranjan Singh & Ors. Etc

Latest Legal News