Shiv Kumar Vs. State of U.P. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
- land acquisition act, 1894 [c.a. no. 1/1894]. section 4; [sushil harkauli, s.k. singh & krishna murari, jj] acquisition of land held, court cannot issue a writ of mandamus directing the state authorities to acquire a particular land. land acquisition is not purely ministerial act to be performed by executive no direction in nature of mandamus whether interim or final can be issued by court under article 226 necessarily to acquire particular land in public interest. land acquisition is not a purely ministerial act to be performed by the executive and therefore, no mandamus can be issued by the court in exercise of its power under article 226 of the constitution, whether suo motu or otherwise, whether in public interest litigation or otherwise directing acquisition of land under the provisions of land acquisition act, 1894. it would, however, be open to the court in exercise of that power to invite the attention of the executive to any public purpose and the need for land for meeting that public purpose and to require the executive to take a decision, even a reasoned decision, with regard to the same in accordance with the statutory provisions, perhaps even within a reasonable time frame. however, the power of the court under article 226 must necessarily stop at that. thereafter, if the decision taken by the executive is capable of challenge and, there exist appropriate legal grounds for such challenge, it may also be open to the court to quash the decision and to require reconsideration. but no direction in the nature of mandamus whether interim or final can be issued by the court under article 226 to the executive to necessarily acquire a particular area of a particular piece of land for a particular public purpose. section 4; compulsory acquisition of land powers of state government held, renewal of lease in favour of petitioners would not take away power of state government of compulsory acquisition of land. renewal of lease would at best be taken into consideration for determining quantum of compensation. - 'bhopa, district muzaffarnagar shall be admitted to bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the chief judicial magistrate concerned.orderm.l. singhal, j.1. i have heard the learned counsel for the accused-applicant and the learned a.g.a. for the state.2. it is alleged that on 31 -5-1998 the accused-applicant, husband of the deceased, along with his father and mother, on account of dowry demand set fire to the deceased resulting in her death. undisputedly, the marriage took place 4-5 years before. there are several allegations of demand of dowry. there is no evidence that soon before her death the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment by the applicant or his any relative in connection with the demand of dowry. the recitals in the first information report state that the applicant himself admitted the deceased in the hospital. the allegations in the fir also show that the parents of the deceased were duly informed. the aforesaid acts of the accused are ; inconsistent with the guilt of the accused-applicant.3. the accused-applicant shiv kumar in case crime no. 95 of 1998 under section 498a/304b, i.p.c. and 3/4, dowry prohibition act, p.s. 'bhopa, district muzaffarnagar shall be admitted to bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the chief judicial magistrate concerned.

Judgment:
ORDER

M.L. Singhal, J.

1. I have heard the learned counsel for the accused-applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. It is alleged that on 31 -5-1998 the accused-applicant, husband of the deceased, along with his father and mother, on account of dowry demand set fire to the deceased resulting in her death. Undisputedly, the marriage took place 4-5 years before. There are several allegations of demand of dowry. There is no evidence that soon before her death the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment by the applicant or his any relative in connection with the demand of dowry. The recitals in the First Information Report state that the applicant himself admitted the deceased in the hospital. The allegations in the FIR also show that the parents of the deceased were duly informed. The aforesaid acts of the accused are ; inconsistent with the guilt of the accused-applicant.

3. The accused-applicant Shiv Kumar in Case Crime No. 95 of 1998 under Section 498A/304B, I.P.C. and 3/4, Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. 'Bhopa, District Muzaffarnagar shall be admitted to bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.