SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
H.R. KHANNA AND A. ALAGIRISWAMI JJ.
The President of the Bihar State Board of Religious Trust and another, Appellants
Versus
Nalini Choudhari and others, Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 2029 of 1970 and Criminal Appeals Nos. 41 and 42 of 1970 D/- 23-8-73.
Civil Appeal No.2029 of 1970.
Criminal Appeals Nos. 41 and 42 of 1970.
The President of the Bihar State Board of Hindu Religious Trust and another, Appellants
Versus
Mahant Ramand Das, Respondent.
Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950 - Section 43, 67, 67 (1), 28, 58, 59 (1), 60 (1), 61, 60, 62, 59 and 43 (1) - Property - Trust Property - Religious Trust - Public Trust - 1st respondent in Civil Appeal was called upon by Bihar State Board of Religious Trusts - He filed writ, out of which this appeal arises, alleging that there was no temple of Giri Gobardhan but only idol of Giri Gobardhan which was his family idol and income of land was not income derived from properties of idol - He further contended that there was no trust of any kind - Whether a decision under Section 43 of Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950 - Whether a notice has been issued or not - Whether there is a trust and whether any person is a trustee of such a trust - Whether by necessary implication Section 43 would bar any prosecution under Section 67 - Whether any immovable property is or is not a trust property - Whether there is any religious trust - Whether any person is a trustee or not - Whether there is any trust or whether any person is a trustee - Whether person prosecuted is a trustee - Whether any trust is a trust coming within ambit of Act and whether person prosecuted is a trustee - Whether it is a public trust or a private trust – Held, Incidentally and indirectly, in such a case question may arise for determination of authority and, on determination of this question, ultimate declaration which authority would be competent to give under sub-section (3) of Section 43 will be that property is or is not trust property - But unless determination of character of trust is involved incidentally and indirectly, authority, either within terms of sub-section (1) or as made expressly clear by terms of sub-section (3), has got no jurisdiction to adjudicate purely in regard to nature of trust and to give a declaration - Properties under consideration there did not constitute a public trust and this Court therefore pointed out that as long as the declaration made by High Court in First Appeal stands and in absence of some evidence to contrary, appellant was entitled to say that properties did not constitute a public trust and Act and its provisions did not apply to it - Further observations of this Court did not say that a decision under Section 43 was a prerequisite to a prosecution under Section 67 - This Court left it open to respondents therein, i.e. Board, to take such steps as may be available to them in law to get it determined by a competent authority that in question is a public trust - Appeals allowed.
Judgment
ALAGIRISWAMI, J:- These three appeals arise out of the common judgment of the High Court of Patna in Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 571 of 1969 and Criminal Miscellaneous Cases Nos. 1181 and 1182 of 1969. The question that arises for decision in all the three appeals is the same: whether a decision under Section 43 of the Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950 (hereinafter to be called the Act) is a condition precedent to the launching of a prosecution under Section 67 of that Act. The facts necessary may first be stated. The 1st respondent in the Civil Appeal No. 2029 of 1970 was called upon by the Bihar State Board of Religious Trusts to submit a statement relating to the Giri Gobardhan Mandir of Bana Nava Gram on pain of prosecution under Section 67. Thereupon he filed the writ, out of which this appeal arises, alleging that there was no temple of Giri Gobardhan but only the idol of Giri Gobardhan which was his family idol and the income of the land was not the income derived from the properties of the idol. He further contended that there was no trust of any kind relating to the properties and that no member of the public had any access to the idol nor was any offering made by them and prayed for the notices issued by the Board to be quashed. The respondent in Criminal Appeal No. 41 of 1970 who was prosecuted under Section 67 of the Act claimed that he was the sole shebait of a temple in village Basgarhia in the district of Darbhanga. He also did not submit the account demanded under the Act on the ground that the property of which the return was sought was not trust property and that without a declaration under Section 43 of the Act he could not be prosecuted under Section 67. The respondent in Criminal Appeal No. 42 of 1970, who was similarly prosecuted claimed that the temple in village Basgarhia in the district of Purnea of which he was the sole shebait was within the family dwelling house with which the public have no concern and that he was, therefore, not liable to render an account of the income and expenditure. His other contention was also similar to the contention of the respondent in Civil Appeal No. 41 of 1970. The High Court allowed the three petitions and quashed the notice issued as well as the prosecutions. The Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Board has filed these appeals.
2. Section 67 (1) of the Act reads:
"If a trustee fails without reasonable cause, the burden of proving which shall be upon him, to comply with any order or direction made or issued under clause (i), (o) or (q) of sub-section (2) of Section 28, or under Section 58, to comply with the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 59, sub-section (1) of Section 60. Section 61 or Section 62, or to furnish any statement, annual account, estimate, explanation or other document or information relating to the religious trust of which he is the trustee, which he is required or called upon to furnish under any of the provisions of this Act, he shall be punishable with fine which may extend in the case of the first offence, to two hundred rupees, and, in the case of the second or any subsequent offence, to five hundred rupees and, in default of payment of the fine, with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months or one year, as the case may be."
Under Section 59 of the Act, within six months from the date of the publication in the Official Gazette of the names of the President and members of the first Board, the trustees of every religious trust existing on the said date should furnish to the Board a statement in the prescribed form containing the prescribed particulars in respect of the trust of which he is the trustee. Under Section 60, the trustee of every religious trust has to prepare a budget of such trust and send a copy thereof to the -Board. Under Sections 59 and 60 there is no obligation cast on the Board to give a notice to the trustee calling upon him to furnish the statement contemplated under Section 59 or the budge
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.