Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
SWARANA KANTA SHARMA
Aman Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of NCT of Delhi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition filed for fir quashing. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. events leading to the fir registration. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. legal background regarding land acquisition. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. supreme court's observations impact case. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 5. infructuous fir due to court orders. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 6. quashing of fir based on jurisdiction. (Para 12 , 14) |
| 7. dismissal of petition. (Para 15) |
JUDGMENT
Swarana Kanta Sharma, J. The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("Cr.P.C.") by the petitioners seeking quashing of the FIR bearing no. 592/2014 registered at P.S. Saket, New Delhi under Sections 447/506 of Indian Penal Code ("IPC") and Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 ("PDPP Act").
2. Brief facts, leading to the filing of present petition, are as follows:
a. A sale deed bearing registration no. 6768 was executed on 01.10.1963, in favour of the joint owners Messrs Jagjit Singh and Girdharilal, in respect of a land measuring 2 bishas and 4 biswas (approx. 2200 sq. yards) located at Khasra no. 156 at Lado Sarai, Delhi.
b. By an award dated 14.09.1986 of the SDM/LAO(ME), Delhi, the said land was acquired by the De
The FIR became infructuous due to the lapse of land acquisition proceedings under Section 24(2) of the LARR Act, leaving no legal basis for the charges against the petitioners.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that for the acquisition proceedings to lapse under Section 24(2) of Act of 2013, both the contingencies of non-possession and non-payment of compe....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that for lapsing of acquisition proceedings under Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013, both the conditions of physical possession and payment of compe....
Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – Period during which interim order passed by Court is/was operative, has to be excluded in computation of five years’ period.
(1) Courts should adjudicate on all issues and give its findings on all issues and not to pronounce judgment only on one of issues.(2) Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – There being delay in pass....
The petition under Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 must meet the gap period of five years, and the physical possession and compensation tender must be valid. The essentiality of the land for public ....
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
