AI Overview...

Understanding Section 24: Applicability Across Legal Proceedings

Section 24 appears in multiple Indian statutes, often sparking questions about its scope: Can Sec 24 apply in any proceedings initiated? The answer is nuanced—it depends on the specific law, context, and judicial interpretations. While not universally applicable, courts have extended Section 24 provisions in CrPC, CPC, land acquisition laws, and consumer protection to diverse scenarios, provided certain conditions are met. This post analyzes key cases to clarify when and how it operates, drawing from Supreme Court and High Court rulings.

Disclaimer: This article provides general legal information based on case precedents. It is not legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for case-specific guidance, as outcomes vary by facts and jurisdiction.

Section 24 in Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC): Transfer and Compounding

CrPC Section 24 deals with the general power of High Courts (or Supreme Court) to transfer cases. It typically applies to proceedings initiated in subordinate courts within the High Court's jurisdiction. However, its use is not limitless.

Key Principles from Case Law

• Jurisdiction Tied to Cause of Action: The cause of action determines jurisdiction. Cause of action arises where the offence was committed and proceedings should be initiated at that place – In essence it is the cause of action for initiation of the proceedings against the accused. The High Court must reconsider orders if this is overlooked. Y. A. Ajit VS Sofana Ajit - 2007 6 Supreme 119


• Transfer Petitions: In matrimonial or criminal cases, applications under Sec 24 CPC (often confused with CrPC) for transfer must be filed where the suit originates. For instance, a suit at Lakhimpur Khiri falls under Lucknow Bench jurisdiction, not Allahabad. The cause of action for the application under Section 24 of the code, arose on the initiation of proceedings at Lakhimpur Khiri. JYOTSAN DIXIT VS CIVIL JUDGE, KHIRI - 1997 Supreme(All) 1481

Courts exercise this power sparingly for justice, convenience, or fairness, but only if proceedings have commenced.

Compounding Under CrPC Sec 320 vs Sec 482

A landmark case under IPC Sec 307 (attempt to murder) illustrates Sec 482 CrPC quashing proceedings post-settlement, even where Sec 320 doesn't directly apply:
- Settlement Trumps Prosecution: In view of settlement no witness likely to turn up to support prosecution – Despite nature of injuries, FIR and the proceedings ought to have been quashed. Narinder Singh VS State of Punjab - 2014 2 Supreme 642
- Distinction: Sec 320 guides compounding based on compromise; Sec 482 serves ends of justice without Sec 320 limits. Even for heinous crimes like Sec 307, long disputes resolved by village elders justified quashing. Narinder Singh VS State of Punjab - 2014 2 Supreme 642

Takeaway: Sec 24 CrPC aids transfers in initiated proceedings; Sec 482 complements for quashing post-compromise.

Section 24 in Land Acquisition Laws: Lapse of Proceedings

The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (RFCTLARR Act), Sec 24 is a hotbed for litigation. It does not create new causes of action for concluded proceedings but governs pending or lapsed ones.

Lapse Under Sec 24(2)

• Twin Conditions for Lapse: If an award under 1894 Act was made ≥5 years before 2013 Act, and either physical possession not taken or compensation not paid, proceedings lapse. Sec. 24(2) of Act of 2013 does not give rise to new cause of action to question the legality of concluded proceedings of land acquisition. Kalawati Devi VS State of U. P. - 2021 Supreme(All) 257 Maheshbhai Revabhai Pandya VS State Of Gujarat - 2020 Supreme(Guj) 961


• Physical Possession Required: Symbolic possession insufficient; actual possession mandatory. Deposits in treasury count as paid. HOUSING COMMISSIONER, KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD VS STATE OF KARNATAKA - 2015 Supreme(Kar) 409 K. M. Devarajan VS State of Kerala, Represented by The Secretary to Government, Public Works Department, Secretariat - 2018 Supreme(Ker) 77

Applicability Limits

| Scenario | Applies? | Rationale |
|----------|----------|-----------|
| Award passed <5 years pre-2013 | No lapse | Proceedings continue under old Act Arun Sitaram Patil VS State Of Maharashtra - 2023 Supreme(Bom) 1029 |
| No award under Sec 11 (1894 Act) | Compensation under 2013 Act | But proceedings don't lapse Sakharbai Haribhau Shelke, Since deceased through her L. Rs. VS Sub Divisional Officer - 2014 Supreme(Bom) 992 |
| Concluded proceedings (award, possession, payment) | No | Sec 24(2) inapplicable Orchid Realtors (P) Ltd VS Union Of India - 2022 Supreme(Del) 1185 |
| BDA/KUDA Act acquisitions | Limited | Only if initiated under 1894 Act Bengaluru Development Authority VS Vishwanatha Reddy - 2021 Supreme(Kar) 919 |

Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 does not give rise to new cause of action to question the legality of concluded proceedings. Repeatedly upheld. Kalawati Devi VS State of U. P. - 2021 Supreme(All) 257

Section 24 in Civil Procedure Code (CPC): Transfer Powers

CPC Sec 24 empowers courts to transfer suits for convenience. Like CrPC, it applies to initiated proceedings:
- High Court Benches: Jurisdiction follows the original court's location. Convenience alone insufficient without cause. JYOTSAN DIXIT VS CIVIL JUDGE, KHIRI - 1997 Supreme(All) 1481
- Maintenance in Matrimonial Suits: Courts stay divorce proceedings until maintenance (under Hindu Marriage Act Sec 24) compliance. Court is not powerless... City Civil Court must have exercised inherent powers under Sec. 151 CPC to stay proceeding. NEETA SHREYAS JOSHI VS SHREYAS SIDDHARTH JOSHI - 1999 Supreme(Guj) 68

Consumer Protection and Other Contexts

• Consumer Protection Act Sec 24A (Limitation): Cause accrues on claim repudiation, not death. The date of cause of action arises on repudiation of claim rather than death itself. Article 44 Limitation Act inapplicable. MEENA DEVI vs LIC OF INDIA - 2022 Supreme(Online)(NCDRC) 1295 Sameer Patil VS ICICI Lombard General Insurance


• MSMED Act Sec 24: Overrides Arbitration Act; Facilitation Council can arbitrate post-conciliation. Bhagwat Enterprises VS Micro And Small Enterprises Facilitation Council - 2023 Supreme(Bom) 1900

When Does Sec 24 NOT Apply?

• Concluded Proceedings: No revival. Orchid Realtors (P) Ltd VS Union Of India - 2022 Supreme(Del) 1185


• Vested Rights: Amendments can't retrospectively bar revisions unless specified. Vishanji VS State Of Bihar - 1960 Supreme(Pat) 150


• Per Incuriam Directions: Courts correct errors but uphold finality. Extensive Antulay case analysis shows Supreme Court recalling transfers violating special acts. A. R. Antulay VS R. S. Nayak - 1988 Supreme(SC) 337

Key Takeaways

• Context Matters: Sec 24's applicability hinges on the statute—transfers (CrPC/CPC), lapse (Land Acquisition), or limitation (Consumer).


• Initiated Proceedings: Generally yes, if conditions met (e.g., no lapse in acquisition).


• Judicial Caution: Courts limit to prevent abuse; cause of action/origin court key.


• Practical Tip: File transfers/jurisdiction pleas early; settlements powerful under Sec 482.

In summary, Sec 24 can apply in any proceedings initiated under its governing law, but with strict limits. Cases like IPC 307 quashing Narinder Singh VS State of Punjab - 2014 2 Supreme 642 and land lapses K. M. Devarajan VS State of Kerala, Represented by The Secretary to Government, Public Works Department, Secretariat - 2018 Supreme(Ker) 77 show flexibility, while finality principles protect concluded matters. Stay informed on evolving jurisprudence.

Word count approx. 1050. Sources cited from authentic judgments.