Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From the High Court of Judicature at Madras)
M.R. SHAH, B.V. NAGARATHNA, JJ.
Registrar General, High Court of Judicature at Madras – Appellant
Versus
The State, represented by the Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Chennai & Another – Respondents
CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 272-274 OF 2022 (Arising out of S.L.P.(Criminal) Nos. 1752-1754 of 2022 @ D.No. 2419/2022
Decided On : 23-02-2022
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 482 – Exercise of inherent jurisdiction – Parameters – Powers of High Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. are wide and are in nature of inherent power yet, said power cannot be exercised suo motu in a sweeping manner and beyond contours of what is stipulated under the Section – By impugned orders, Single Judge of High Court has directed transfer of cases/final reports filed/pending in Special Courts exclusively to deal with Land Grabbing Cases to respective jurisdictional Courts – Original Criminal Petition was already disposed of by Single Judge – Single Judge had become functus officio – To pass such type of orders on a ‘special mentioning’ that too, in a disposed of matter is unheard of and unknown to law – Practice of passing such orders on a ‘special mentioning’, in a disposed of matter is to be deprecated – Orders transferring cases being wholly without jurisdiction, are unsustainable and deserve to be quashed and set aside. (Paras 4 and 7)
Facts of the case:
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned final judgment and orders dated 05.08.2019, 27.08.2019 and 29.08.2019 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Criminal O.P. No. 20889/2019, by which the learned Single Judge of the High Court has directed to transfer 864 cases in which the final reports have been filed before concerned Special Courts for Land Grabbing Cases pending in various districts and has directed the concerned Special Courts before whom the final reports are filed to return back the final reports filed by concerned investigating officers of the respective police stations in order to enable those final reports to be filed before the concerned jurisdictional Courts, the High Court of Judicature at Madras through Registrar General has preferred the present appeals, being in a quandary with regard to the implementation of the impugned orders though passed on the judicial side.
Findings of Court:
High Courts ought to be mindful and conscious about the consequences of passing orders such as those impugned in these appeals. Though powers of the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are wide and are in the nature of inherent power yet, the said power cannot be exercised suo motu in a sweeping manner and beyond contours of what is stipulated under the said Section.
Result : Appeals allowed.
ORDER
1. Application for permission to file the special leave petitions is allowed. Delay in filing the special leave petitions is condoned. 1a. Leave granted
2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned final judgment and orders dated 05.08.2019, 27.08.2019 and 29.08.2019 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Criminal O.P. No. 20889/2019, by which the learned Single Judge of the High Court has directed to transfer 864 cases in which the final reports have been filed before the concerned Special Courts for Land Grabbing Cases pending in various districts and has directed the concerned Special Courts before whom the final reports are filed to return back the final reports filed by the concerned investigating officers of the respective police stations in order to enable those final reports to be filed before the concerned jurisdictional Courts, the High Court of Judicature at Madras through the Registrar General has preferred the present appeals, being in a quandry with regard to the implementation of the impugned orders though passed on the judicial side.
3. The facts leading to the present appeals in a nutshell are as under:
3.1 By a common judgment and order dated 10.02.2015 passed in Writ Petition No. 18872/2014 and other allied writ petitions, the High Court has set aside G.O (Ms) No. 423 dated 28.07.2011 and G.O.(Ms) No. 451, Home (Court III) Department dated 11.08.2011. While allowing those writ petitions, the High Court has also observed that the State Government is at liberty to enact any appropriate legislation on the lines of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 or better legislations. The common judgment and order dated 10.02.2015 passed in Writ Petition No. 18872/2014 and other allied writ petitions is the subject matter before this Court by way of Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. 6050- 6078 of 2015.
3.2 That by order dated 27.02.2015, this Court, while issuing notice in the aforesaid special leave petitions, stayed the operation and implementation of the judgment and order dated 10.02.2015 passed by the High Court. Meaning thereby, pursuant to the said interim order, the aforesaid G.O. No. 423 dated 28.07.2011 and G.O. No. 451 dated 11.08.2011 are in operation and the jurisdiction of the Land Grabbing Cases is to be continued with the Special Cell/Special Courts.
3.3 That, during the pendency of the aforesaid special leave petitions, one, S. Natarajan, original complainant in Crime No. 434/2015 pending on the file of the Special Court for Land Grabbing Cases No. II, Chennai, filed Criminal O.P. No. 20889/2019 before the High Court, seeking transfer of the said case from the Special Court to the Court of CCB and CBCID, Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai. By order dated 05.08.2019, the learned Single Judge of the High Court has allowed/disposed of the said petition and has directed the concerned police officials to take back the final report from the Special Court for Land Grabbing Cases No. II, Chennai and to file the same before the CCB and CBCID, Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai.
3.4 That thereafter, on ‘mentioning’ made by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor in the disposed of matter, being the aforesaid Criminal O.P. No. 20889/2019, disposed of vide order dated 05.08.2019, a further order dated 27.08.2019 came to be passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court directing transfer of other 82 cases pending on the files of the Special Courts to the jurisdictiona
(1) Powers of High Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. cannot be exercised suo motu in a sweeping manner and beyond contours of what is stipulated under the Section.(2) A disposed of matter cannot be ....
In absence of any guidelines and/or definition as to which cases can be said to be land grabbing cases, it gives unfettered and unguided and arbitrary powers to the police to treat any land case as a....
The High Court lacks jurisdiction to hear Land Grabbing Appeals after the abolition of the Special Court; such appeals are not maintainable without a designated appellate forum as per the Act.
A Judgment and Order of the Special Tribunal under the Assam Land Grabbing [Prohibition] Act, 2010, deciding the civil liability, is a judicial order of a civil court and cannot be challenged in the ....
The provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure can apply to proceedings under special enactments unless explicitly stated otherwise, reinforcing the need for adherence to natural justice principles.
The court affirmed that possession without legal title constitutes land grabbing, rejecting the petitioners' claim of adverse possession due to lack of evidence.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the delineation of the jurisdiction of the Principal District Judge or the Chief Judge, City Civil Court in transferring cases, particularly in ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
