SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2012 Supreme(P&H) 605

2012(3) LAW HERALD (P&H) 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mehinder Singh Sullar
Criminal Misc. No. M-51514 of 2007
M/s Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Ltd. & Ors.
v.
Haryana State Pollution Control Board
{Decided on 03/05/2012}

Advocates:
Argued by:- Mr. R.S. Rai, Senior Advocate with Mr. Gautam Dutt, Advocate.
Mr. A.S. Chadha, Advocate
Mr. Akshay Bhan, Advocate
Mr. Sanjeev Manrai, Advocate
Ms. Jaishree Thakur, Advocate
Mr. C.S. Rana,Advocate
Mr. Sumeet Goel, Advocate
Mr. Sanjeev Sharma, Advocate
Mr. Jaivir Yadav, Advocate
Mr. Ravinder Kumar Rana, Advocate
Mr. S.K. Garg Narwana, Advocate
Mr. Suneesh Bindlesh, Advocate
Mr. Vikram Choudhary, Advocate
Mr. Sandeep Kumar Sharma, Advocate
Mr. Pankaj Katia, Advocate
Mr. Ajay Nara, Advocate
Mr. Anil Malik, Advocate
Mr. Rajiv Kataria, Advocate
Mr. S.K. Panwar, Advocate
Mr. Deepak Balyan, Advocate
Mr. Neelesh Bhardwaj, Advocate
Mr. Kapil Sharma, Advocate
Mr. Sanjay Vij, Advocate & Mr. Sanjeev Pabbi, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. H.S. Hooda, Advocate General, Haryana with Mr. Arun Walia, Advocate for the respondent.

Quashing--Development of preserved area, into Farm houses and further selling them, without applying for obtaining the prior required sanction and environment clearance--Summoning orders rightly issued--Subsequent vendees/transferees also liable.

Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code 1973, S.482--Quashing--Development of area, Gairmumkin Pahad, into Farm houses and further selling them, without applying for obtaining the prior required sanction and environment clearance--Criminal complaints by pollution Board not liable to be quashed--Summoning orders rightly issued--The solitary fact that the developers have informed the Director, Town and Country Planning and other irrelevant authorities under the different Acts, before the issuance of the said notification is not at all a cogent ground to quash the impugned complaints and summoning orders--The acts committed by the subsequent vendees/transferees are so intermingled and mixed with the same series of the acts of these petitioners, culminating into the offences, are still continuing, so, their cases cannot possibly be segregated from the criminal offences committed by the developers--Therefore, they cannot escape the criminal liability in any manner and are liable to be legally punished--As contemplated under Sections 35 to 38 of IPC as well--Punjab Land Preservation Act, 1900--Punjab Scheduled Roads & Controlled Areas Restriction of Unregulated Development Act, 1963--Haryana Development & Regulations of Urban Areas Act, 1875--Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, S.15 & 19

       Because they have not obtained any requisite prior approval/sanction from the competent authority and violated the provisions of the Act of 1986, for which they have been prosecuted--If any Patwari without any legal authority had made the stray entries in the Khasra Girdawari for some consideration and for the reasons best known to him, which were illegal & without any authority and further carried out in the column of Jamabandi (Annexure P6/T colly) and Aksh Sizra (Annexure P21), then, such stray and illegal entries are not est. void and are not sufficient to hold that the land in litigation was Gairmumkin Farm houses--Such entries deserve to be out rightly ignored and kind of land in dispute (Gairmumkin Mountain (Pahad) would remain the same for all intents and purposes in this relevant behalf--Acts of 1963 & 1975 operate altogether differently in their respective domain/fields--The purpose, aims. Objects, scope, jurisdiction, area, manner of operation, ambit, action and remedies of these Acts are entirely different and are not at all relatable in any manner to the provisions of the Act of 1986 and the notification--Therefore, the letters written by the Director, Town & Country Planning, Executive Engineers, Electrical Inspectorate, Haryana etc. under the different Acts and the alleged clarification made by the Additional Director of the Central Government, vide letter dated 1.11.2006 (Annexure P17)( in CRM No. M 51514 of 2007) & (Annexure P12) in (CRM No. M-880 of 2010) and report of the Patwari/ Tehsildar (irrelevant authorities), ipso facto, are not at all sufficient to wipe out the criminal liabilities/ offences committed by the petitioners--Accused under the Act of 1986 and notification (Annexure P5), particularly when it is not yet clear/proved that they were legally competent /authorized to issue such clarification in this respect.

       (B) Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.35 to 38--Where the element of a particular Knowledge or a particular intention enters in the composition of a crime, all the co-accused are liable for the same offence.

       It provides that where several persons are concerned in committing an act, which is criminal only by reason of its being done with a criminal knowledge and whosoever assists in the commission of such offence--each of such persons, who joins in the act with such knowledge is liable for the act in the same manner as if the act were done by him alone with knowledge--In that eventuality, the criminal law only concerns to the result of the commissions of offence and not to the means by which it has been achieved and whosoever cooperates in the cumulative result of the commissions of such offence is equally liable in this relevant behalf. (Para 44)

JUDGMENT

Mr. Mehinder Singh Sullar, J.: - As identical questions of law and facts are involved, therefore, I propose to decide all the cases of petitioners-accused (developers), depicted in Schedule A and those of subsequent vendees/transferees, mentioned in Schedule B (attached herewith), by virtue of this common judgment, in order to avoid the repetition. However, the relevant facts and material, which need a necessary mention for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant petitions, extracted from main petitions (1) CRM No. M-51514 of 2007 titled as “M/s Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Haryana State Pollution Control Board” of Schedule ‘A’ and (2) CRM No. M-880 of 2010 titled as “Arvinder S.Brara Vs. Haryana State Pollution Control Board” of Schedule ‘B’, would be referred in subsequent part of this judgment for ready reference in this context.

2. Exhibiting the deep concern of degradation of environmental indiscipline, adversely affecting the humanity at large, the United Nations Organization (U.N.O.) convened an International Conference on human environment w.e.f. 5th to 16th of June, 1972 at Stockholm, in which, the Indian delegation led by the Prime Minister of India participated as well. Inter-alia, the gist of the proclamation/resolution adopted in the Conference, in substance, is as under:-

“1. Man is both creature and moulder of his environment which gives him physical sustenance and affords him the opportunity for intellectual, moral, social and spiritual growth. In the long and tortuous evolution of the human race on this planet a stage has been reached when through the rapid acceleration of science and technology, man has acquired the power, to transform his environment in countess ways and on an unprecedented scale. Both aspects of man’s environment, the natural and the man made, are essential to his well being and to the enjoyment of basic human rights – Even the right to life itself.

2. The protection and improvement of the human environment is a major issue which affects the well-being of peoples and economic development throughout the world, it is the urgent desire of the peoples of the whole world and the duty of all Governments.

3. Man has constantly to sum up experience and go on discovering, inventing, creating and advancing. In our time man’s capability to transform his surroundings, if used wisely, can bring to all peoples the benefits of development and the opportunity to enhance the quality of life. Wrongly or heedlessly applied, the same power can do incalculable harm to human beings and the human environment. We see around us growing evidence of man-made harm in many regions of the earth; dangerous levels of pollution in water, air, earth and living beings; major and undesirable disturbances to the ecological balance of the biosphere; destruction and depletion of irreplaceable resources; and gross deficiencies harmful to the physical, mental and social health of man, in the man-made environment; particularly in the living and working environment.

A point has been reached in history when we must shape our actions throughout the world with a more prudent care for their environmental consequences. Through ignorance or indifference we can do massive and irreversible harm to the earthly environment on which our life and well-being depend. Conversely, through fuller, knowledge and wiser action, we can achieve for ourselves and our posterity a better life in an environment more in keeping with human needs and hopes. There are broad vistas for the enhancement of environmental quality and the creation of a good life. What is needed is an enthusiastic but calm state of mind and intence but orderly work. For the purpose of attaining freedom in the world of nature man must use knowledge to build in collaboration with nature a better environment. To defend and improve the human environment for present and future generations has become an imperative goal for





















































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top