Table of Contents

S. No.

Subject

1

Preface

2

Topics - Issues of Challenge

Part (I)

Presidential Assent and Repugnancy - Article 254 of the Constitution of India

(A) Arguments of the learned counsels for the parties

(B) Topics of Analysis

(a) Scope and interpretation of entries in the Seventh Schedule

(b) Pith and substance of The Gujarat Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 2020

(c) Repugnancy and Presidential Assent

(d) Incidental Trenching

(e) Dealing with the arguments of the learned counsels on the apparent conflict of different provisions of the Gujarat Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 2020 with Central laws:

(i) Conflict with the Civil Criminal Procedure Code

(ii) Effect of Section 15 of the Act 2020

(iii) Contradictions shown with The Specific Relief, The Limitation Act and The Transfer of Property Act

(C) Conclusion on Repugnancy and Presidential Assent

Part (II)

Manifest Arbitrariness - violation of Article 14 of the Constitution:

(A) Arguments of the learned counsels for the parties:

(a) Mischief Rule

(b) Manifest Arbitrariness in the provisions of the Land Grabbing Act 2020 and the Rules made thereunder

(B) Analysis:

(a) General Principles of testing the constitutionality of an Enactment

(b) Analysing the Statement of Objects and reasons of the Act 2020

(c) Dealing with the plea of violation of Article 14 by treating un-equals as equals

(d) Taking aid of the decisions of the Apex Court pertaining to Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing Act, 1982

(C) Conclusion:

Reverting to the Land Grabbing Act, 2020:

(a) Object and purpose of Act 2020, Scope of jurisdiction of Special Court

(b) Reverse burden

(c) Section 7(2) - Dispute re-jurisdiction of Special Courts

(d) Section 9 of the Act 2020 - unguided and unbridled power to Special Courts

(e) Section 12(a) - Re-Constitution of the Committee

(f) Rule 5 of Rules 2020 - Re-Procedure of inquiry into the complaints

Part (III)

Doctrine of proportionality and Validity of Mandatory Minimum Sentence:

(A) Arguments of the learned counsels:

(a) Law of Proportionality

(b) Usurpation of power by Legislature in providing sentencing policy

(c) Vesting of discretion in authorities

(d) Unbridled and untrammeled discretion leads to arbitrariness

(B) Analysis and Conclusion:

(a) Proportionality doctrine and test of reasonableness

(b) Proportionality and sentencing under criminal law

(c) Legislative supremacy and power of Judicial review

Part (IV)

Mens rea and retrospectivity - violation of Article 20 of the Constitution

Part (V)

Rule 5(2) - Effect of inclusion of the word: “headstrong”

Part (VI)

Pari materia Enactment of other States

Part (VII)

Conclusion: Operative Portion