State of U.P. Vs. Iftekhar and ors. - 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. - the accused and the defence counsel as well the prosecution has accepted the genuineness of the post mortem examination report. the medical officer from the facts and circumstances regarding the post mortem examination report would have been in a position to throw better light whether it was a case of suicide or hanging by the others.order1. heard learned aga. we have also gone through the judgment and order.2. the trial court had decided the case in a very cursory mariner even if it is a case of suicide within seven years of the marriage the burden always rests upon the accused to explain the cause behind such suicide. the accused has come out in trial with the defence that she was suffering from abdominal ailment for which she was also subjected to operation process but in no way the problem was remedied. as a consequence she lodged herself in a room bolted from inside and committed suicide. there is evidence on record that the latch of the room was opened by another woman, wife of father-in-law by putting her hand from outside. if the latch could be removed from outside by placing hand then certainly it could also be bolted from outside. this was the aspect which has to be given due consideration by the trial court but it some how or the other skipped his attention. the trial has been taken on fast pace. the accused and the defence counsel as well the prosecution has accepted the genuineness of the post mortem examination report. its genuineness and also the other documents. in the case of this nature the medical evidence has been of serious importance. the medical officer from the facts and circumstances regarding the post mortem examination report would have been in a position to throw better light whether it was a case of suicide or hanging by the others.3. in view of the above discussion we find it a fit case for grant of leave.4. leave to file this government appeal is granted.

Judgment:
ORDER

1. Heard learned AGA. We have also gone through the judgment and order.

2. The trial Court had decided the case in a very cursory mariner even if it is a case of suicide within seven years of the marriage the burden always rests upon the Accused to explain the cause behind such suicide. The accused has come out in trial with the defence that she was suffering from abdominal ailment for which she was also subjected to operation process but in no way the problem was remedied. As a consequence she lodged herself in a room bolted from inside and committed suicide. There is evidence on record that the latch of the room was opened by another woman, wife of father-in-law by putting her hand from outside. If the latch could be removed from outside by placing hand then certainly it could also be bolted from outside. This was the aspect which has to be given due consideration by the trial Court but it some how or the other skipped his attention. The trial has been taken on fast pace. The accused and the defence counsel as well the prosecution has accepted the genuineness of the post mortem examination report. Its genuineness and also the other documents. In the case of this nature the medical evidence has been of serious importance. The medical officer from the facts and circumstances regarding the post mortem examination report would have been in a position to throw better light whether it was a case of suicide or hanging by the others.

3. In view of the above discussion we find it a fit case for grant of leave.

4. Leave to file this Government Appeal is granted.