Back
2017 Supreme(Pat) 10
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH, J.
Urmila Masomat, Wife of Late Narayan Choudhary - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar through Superintendent of Police, Katihar & Ors. - Respondents
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1105 of 2015
Decided On : 11-01-2017
For the Petitioner: Mr. Bimal Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr. A.B. Sinha (SC-19).
Orders passed without jurisdiction are considered null and void, and the Lok Adalats do not have the power to extend their jurisdiction beyond the scope granted under the Legal Services Authorities Act.
Headnote:
Lok Adalat - Jurisdiction and Procedural Impropriety - Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, Section 19, Section 22, Indian Penal Code, Section 302, Section 34 - The court set aside the awards passed by the Lok Adalat in 1161 non-compoundable criminal cases, citing lack of jurisdiction and procedural impropriety. The court emphasized that the Lok Adalats do not have the power to extend their jurisdiction beyond the scope granted under the Act, and the orders/awards passed in the cases were deemed 'Coram non judice'. The judgment referenced key legal provisions such as the Legal Services Authorities Act and the Indian Penal Code, and highlighted the principle that orders passed without jurisdiction are considered null and void.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the award passed by the Lok Adalat, citing lack of notice, absence of parties, and disposal of the case without any compromise or settlement. The court examined the records and found procedural impropriety in the disposal of the cases by the Lok Adalat.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Lok Adalat had acted without jurisdiction and in procedural impropriety, leading to the setting aside of the awards in 1161 non-compoundable criminal cases. The court emphasized the need for restoration of the cases to their original files and expeditious disposal by the courts of competent jurisdiction.
Issues: The issues included the jurisdiction of Lok Adalat in non-compoundable offenses, passing of awards without compromise or settlement, and disposal of cases by affixing pre-prepared award stamps.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that Lok Adalats do not have the power to extend their jurisdiction beyond the scope granted under the Act, and orders passed without jurisdiction are considered null and void. The procedural impropriety in the disposal of cases by the Lok Adalat led to the setting aside of the awards.
Final Decision: The court set aside the awards passed by the Lok Adalat in 1161 non-compoundable criminal cases and directed the restoration of the cases to their original files for expeditious disposal by the courts of competent jurisdiction.
The petitioner Urmila Masomat challenged the award dated 18th December, 2011 passed by the Presiding Officer, Mega Lok Adalat, Katihar, whereby Amdabad P.S.Case No. 38 of 2002 dated 12th June, 2002 registered under Section 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short “IPC”) was disposed of.
2. The issues which fell for consideration in the writ application were three fold, which are as under :-
(i) Whether a Lok Adalat constituted under Section 19 or a permanent Lok Adalat constituted under Section 22 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (for short “the Act”) shall have jurisdiction in respect of any matter relating to an offence not compoundable under any law ?
(ii) Whether a Lok Adalat constituted under Section 19 of the Act can pass an award without having there any compromise or settlement arrived at between the parties ?
(iii) Whether a member or the Presiding Officer of the Lok Adalat can dispose of any matter by affixing a pre-prepared award stamp ?
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued before the Court that the aforesaid police case instituted under Section 302 of the IPC had been disposed of by the Presiding Officer of Mega Lok Adalat even without serving any notice to the petitioner, who was informant of the case, and in absence of the parties, without there being any settlement or compromise on record.
4. Being shocked and surprised by the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court vide order dated 15th March, 2016 summoned the lower court records of Amdabad P.S.Case No. 38 of 2002 from the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Katihar.
5. On examination of the record, this Court noticed that a serious case registered under Section 302 of the IPC was disposed of by the Presiding Officer of the Mega Lok Adalat on 18th December, 2011 not only in absence of the parties, but also without any settlement or without any notice to them in utter haste. Another disturbing aspect, which the Court noticed was that the Presiding Officer of the Mega Lok Adalat had disposed of the case by affixing and signing a pre-prepared order/award stamp, which reads as under :
“The Case Record Put up today for disposal in Mega Lok Adalat. The Case is disposed in Mega Lok Adalat. Office is directed to deposit the Case Record in RR.
Sd/-
P. O.”
6. Having noticed the aforesaid acts of omission and commission, vide order dated 10th May, 2016, this Court called for an explanation from the Presiding Officer of the Mega Lok Adalat, Katihar, who disposed of the matter on 18th December, 2011.
7. The Presiding Officer in his explanation dated 18th June, 2016 submitted that since there was an atmosphere of enthusiasm and competition to dispose of the maximum number of cases in the Mega Lok Adalat on 18th December, 2011 and the Judicial Officers, including him, were under immense pressure to dispose of the highest number of cases and possibly that was the reason the aforesaid Amdabad P. S. Case No. 38 of 2002 was also disposed of on that day. He further submitted that more than thousand cases were disposed of by different Presiding Officers of Mega Lok Adalat on that day in Katihar judgeship and the manner of disposal was the same, i.e. by affixing a pre-prepared award stamp and signing over it.
8. This Court being dismayed in the manner in which the entire matter had been dealt with undermining the very purpose and object of Lok Adalat, while allowing the writ application by setting aside the award dated 18th December, 2011 passed by the Presiding Officer of Mega Lok Adalat, Katihar vide order dated 12th July, 2016, called for a report from the learned District & Sessions Judge, Katihar as to how many cases involving offences, which were not compoundable under any law were disposed of by the Presiding Officer of the Lok Adalat on 18th December, 2011 and directed the Registry to place the matter before the Court under the heading “For Orders” on receipt of the report.
9. In compliance with the order dated 12th
