Malkhan Singh. and ors Vs State of HaryanA. and ors - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
[r.v. raveendran; a. k. patnaik] indian penal code section 452 - house-trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint -- after investigation, the police filed two challans on 02.02.2006 before the judicial magistrate, first class, ludhiana. after further investigation, the superintendent of police, city-ii, ludhiana, submitted his report to the deputy inspector general of police, ludhiana range. the relevant portion of the report of the superintendent of police, city-ii, ludhiana, which contains his conclusions after further investigation, is extracted herein below: "i found during my investigation that mohan singh, son of shri sher singh , dharmatma singh, harpal singh, jagdev singh and bhupinder singh, sons of mohan singh, residents of pullanwal, sold one plot of 1 kanal 13 marlas on 09.03.2004 to bharpur sigh, harnek singh, sons of balbir singh, jagjit singh, son of amarjit singh, gurcharan singh, son of hari dass and jagdev singh, son of harpal singh, resident of phulanawal through registered sale deed vasikha no.23895 and the mutation no.10940 duly entered in the name of purchasing party. for deciding the issue, we must first refer to the provisions of section 173 of the cr.p.c. under which the police submits reports after investigation and after further investigation, section 190 of the cr. p.c. under which the magistrate takes cognizance of an offence upon a police report and section 482 of the cr.p.c. under which the high court exercises its powers to quash the criminal proceedings. report of police officer on completion of investigation. cognizance of offences by magistrate. sub-section (8) of section 173 further provides that where upon further investigation, the officer in charge of the police station obtains further evidence, oral or documentary, he shall also forward to the magistrate a further report regarding such evidence and the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 173, cr.p.c., shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to such report or reports as they apply in relation to a report forwarded under sub-section (2). thus, the report under sub-section (2) of section 173 after the initial investigation as well as the further report under sub-section (8) of section 173 after further investigation constitute "police report" and have to be forwarded to the magistrate empowered to take cognizance of the offence. r.p. kapur moved the punjab high court under section 561-a of the code of criminal procedure for quashing the proceedings initiated by the first information report. 1. in this writ petition, prayer is to quash the notification issued under section 4 read with clause (c) of sub-section(2) of section 17 of the land acquisition act, 1894, (in short the act) on january 28, 2010, and declaration issued under section 6 read with section 17 of the act on march 8, 2010,. vide the notifications, mentioned above, land was proposed to be acquired for a public purpose, namely, for the construction of 220 kv sub station panchgaon (manesar), district gurgaon. when notice of motion was issued on january 12, 2011, following contention of counsel for the petitioner was noticed: "counsel for the petitioner contends that by invoking the provisions of sections 4 and 6 of the land acquisition act, 1894, notifications were issued on january 28, 2010, and march 8, 2010, respectively, to acquire land for construction of a power sub station. counsel states that notice under section 9 of the aforesaid act was received on january 5, 2011, and no award has been pronounced. further possession is still with the petitioner."2. dispossession of the petitioners was also stayed on the said date.3. in reply filed, nothing has been said to justify the delay in completing the acquisition proceedings. at the time of arguments, we calculated the time frame to know as to whether still there is a time gap to issue a fresh declaration under section 6 of the act or not after hearing the objections under section 5-a of the act. taking note of the stay granted civil writ petition no. 492 of 2011 (o&m;) -3- and the date of issuance of notification under section 4 of the act, we feel that the fresh declaration under section 6 of the act can be issued upto may 26, 2011.4. at the time of arguments, state counsel, on getting instructions from shri r.k.guglani, executive engineer, civil works division, hvpnl gurgaon, states that let the petitioners file objections under section 5-a of the act with the land acquisition collector / district revenue officer, gurgaon, on may 13, 2011, and they shall be provided personal hearing on may 16, 2011. in between, if need be, the authorities will conduct survey of the land in dispute. the proposal made is acceptable to the counsel for the petitioners.5. in view of agreed stand taken by the parties, declaration issued under section of the act qua the land of the petitioners on march 8, 2010, and the award passed on january 12, 2011, qua the land of the petitioners are quashed. liberty is granted to the petitioners to file objections under section 5-a of the act on or before may 13, 2011 and they shall appear before the officer concerned for personal hearing on may 16, 2011. if need be, the state authorities may issue fresh declaration as per law. writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.

Judgment:
1. In this writ petition, prayer is to quash the notification issued under Section 4 read with clause (c) of sub-section(2) of Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, (in short the Act) on January 28, 2010, and declaration issued under Section 6 read with Section 17 of the Act on March 8, 2010,. Vide the notifications, mentioned above, land was proposed to be acquired for a public purpose, namely, for the construction of 220 KV Sub Station Panchgaon (Manesar), district Gurgaon. When notice of motion was issued on January 12, 2011, following contention of counsel for the petitioner was noticed: "Counsel for the petitioner contends that by invoking the provisions of Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, notifications were issued on January 28, 2010, and March 8, 2010, respectively, to acquire land for construction of a Power Sub Station. Counsel states that notice under Section 9 of the aforesaid Act was received on January 5, 2011, and no award has been pronounced. Further possession is still with the petitioner."

2. Dispossession of the petitioners was also stayed on the said date.

3. In reply filed, nothing has been said to justify the delay in completing the acquisition proceedings. At the time of arguments, we calculated the time frame to know as to whether still there is a time gap to issue a fresh declaration under Section 6 of the Act or not after hearing the objections under Section 5-A of the Act. Taking note of the stay granted CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 492 OF 2011 (O&M;) -3- and the date of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act, we feel that the fresh declaration under Section 6 of the Act can be issued upto May 26, 2011.

4. At the time of arguments, State counsel, on getting instructions from Shri R.K.Guglani, Executive Engineer, Civil Works Division, HVPNL Gurgaon, states that let the petitioners file objections under Section 5-A of the Act with the Land Acquisition Collector / District Revenue Officer, Gurgaon, on May 13, 2011, and they shall be provided personal hearing on May 16, 2011. In between, if need be, the authorities will conduct survey of the land in dispute. The proposal made is acceptable to the counsel for the petitioners.

5. In view of agreed stand taken by the parties, declaration issued under Section of the Act qua the land of the petitioners on March 8, 2010, and the Award passed on January 12, 2011, qua the land of the petitioners are quashed. Liberty is granted to the petitioners to file objections under Section 5-A of the Act on or before May 13, 2011 and they shall appear before the officer concerned for personal hearing on May 16, 2011. If need be, the State authorities may issue fresh declaration as per law. Writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.