Back
1963 Supreme(P&H) 159
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Mehar Singh and Jindra Lal JJ.
Gram Panchayat, Ponahana
Versus
Judicial Magistrate, Palwal
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 862 of 1962,
Decided On : SEPTEMBER 10, 1963
Proceedings under section 21 of the Punjab Gram Panchayat Act 1952 are criminal proceedings and thus a criminal case.
Headnote:
PUNJAB GRAM PANCHAYAT ACT 1952 - SECTION 21, 23, 41 - TRANSFER OF PROCEEDINGS - CRIMINAL CASE - INTERPRETATION.
Fact of the Case:
Gram Panchayat Ponahana challenged the order of the Judicial Magistrate transferring proceedings under section 21 of the Punjab Gram Panchayat Act 1952 against respondent 3 from the petitioner-Panchayat to respondent 2 Gram Panchayat Panigwan.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that proceedings under section 21 of the Punjab Gram Panchayat Act 1952 are criminal proceedings and thus a criminal case.
Issues: Whether the proceedings under section 21 of the Punjab Gram Panchayat Act 1952 are criminal proceedings and thus a criminal case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the following points to arrive at its decision: * The Full Bench in Narain Singh V/s. State held that proceedings under sections 21 and 23 of the Act are judicial proceedings. * Section 23 provides for a penalty for disobedience of an order under section 21, making the proceedings criminal in nature. * The proceedings under section 21 are closely connected to the offence under section 23, and cannot be considered separately. * The court also referred to English case law, specifically Payne V/s. Wright, where proceedings under a similar statute were held to be a criminal cause or matter.
Final Decision: The petition of the petitioner-Panchayat was dismissed.
1. This is a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution by Gram Panchayat Ponahana of Tehsil Ferozepore Jhirka in Gurgoan district questioning the legality of the order of respondent No. 1 the judicial Magistrate at Palwal transferring proceedings under section 21 of the Punjab Gram Panchayat Act 1952(Punjab Act 4 of 1953) against respondent 3 Het Lal, from the petitioner-Panchayat to respondent 3 Het Lal from the petitioner-Panchayat to respondent 2 Gram Panchayat Panigwan in the same Tehsil. Respondent 1 has made the order under section 21 are not a criminal case as held by Grover J., in Mukh Ram V/s., Gram Panchyat Mullana C W. Np 1074 of 1959 D/- 27-10-1960(Punj) and that therefore the order of respondent 1 is without jurisdiction. Return to the petition has only been made by respondent 1 and it says that order of transfer of the case was passed after hearing counsel for both the sides and the order made is legal and with jurisdiction because the District Magistrate of Gurgaon delegated his power under section 41 of the Act to him pursuant to sections 74 and 75 of the Act.
2. There is no substance in the stand of the petitioner-Panchayat that respondent 1 made the order behind it s back for respondent 1 has in the return clearly stated that the counsel for the petitioner-Panchayat was also heard before the order was made. The only other question for consideration is whether the order of respondent 1 is without jurisdiction on the ground as urged in the petition.
3. In Punjab Act 4 of 1953 Chapter III has heading "Gram Panchayats Conduct of business duties functions and powers", and it is this chapter that section 21 appears.
Sub-section (1)(a)(i)of this section reads thus-- "21. (1) A Gram Panchayat on receiving a report or other information and on taking such evidence if any as it thinks fit may make a conditional order requiring within a time to be fixed in the order: (a) the owner or the occupier of any "building or land (i) to remove any encroachment on a public street place or drain; X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
Or if he objects so to do to appear before it at a time and place to be fixed by the order and to move to have the order set aside or modified in the manner hereinafter provided. If he does not perform such act or appear and show cause the order shall be made absolute. If he appears and shows cause against the order the Gram Panchayat shall take evident and if it is satisfied that the order is not reasonable and proper no further proceedings shall be taken in the case, If it is not a satisfied the order shall be mad absolute." And section 23 provides that any person who disobeys an order of a Gram Panchayat made under section 21 shall be liable to a penalty which may extend to twenty-five rupees and if the breach is a continuing breach with a further penalty which may extend to one rupee for every day after the first during which the breach continues. The proviso says that the recurring penalty shall not exceed the sum of rupees five hundred. The procedure for abatement of nuisance in section 21 of the act is in substantial detail I analog our to procedure for abatement of nuisance under section S 133, 136 and 137 and the other procedural section connected therewith in the Code of Criminal Procedure. The learned Judges of the Full Bench in Narain Singh V/s. State ILR (1958) Punj) 1696: (AIR 1958 Punj 372 (FB) have pointed this out while holding that proceedings under sections 21 and 23 of the Act are judicial proceedings.
Chapter IV in the Act concerns criminal judicial functions of a Gram Panchayat. Sections 38 says that the criminal jurisdiction of a Gram Panchayat shall be confined to the trial of offences specified in Schedule 1-A to the Act and in that Schedule entry (k) refers to offences "under this Act or under this Act or under any rule or by-law made thereunder are triable by a Gram Panchayat. The proviso to section 41 enacts that a District Magistrate may for reasons to be recorded i
