Quashed

Narayan S/O Nattuji Hale and Another v. the State of Mha. Thr. Pso Ps Jalalkheda Tq.Narkhed Dist.Nagpur and 3 Others

Bombay HC4 Oct 2022WP/509/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Writ Petition challenging a police notice under Section 149 CrPC preventing entry into disputed land. The Court held police cannot issue injunctions. The notice was quashed as the Civil Court is the appropriate authority to decide the property dispute.

What did the court decide?

Quashed and set aside the impugned notice dated 20/06/2022 issued by the Police. Rule made absolute.

Narayan S/O Nattuji Hale and Another Vs the State of Mha… — Landlord and Tenant | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

1/3

¶2

9.cwp.509.22.jud

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

¶4

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.509 OF 2022

¶5

P e t i t i o n e r : 1. Narayan s/o Nattuji Hale, Aged about 59 years, Occupation : Agriculturist, R/o Sawanga Loni, Taluka – Warud, District Amravati.

¶6

2. Sanjay Nattuji Hale,

¶7

Aged about 45 years, Occupation : Agriculturist, R/o Sawanga Loni, Taluka – Warud, District Amravati.

¶8

Versus –

¶9

R e s p o n d e n t s : 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station Officer, Police Station Jalalkheda, Tq. Narkhed, Dist. Nagpur.

¶10

2. ASI Anil Joshi,

¶11

Buckal No.626, Police Station Jalalkheda, Tq. Narkhed, Dist. Nagpur.

¶12

3. Radhabai Nattuji Hale, Aged about 70 years, Occupation : Agriculturist, R/o Sawanga-Loni, Tq. Warud, Dist. Amravati.

¶13

4. Sunita w/o Lehegram Tavale, Aged about 42 years, Occupation : Agriculturist, R/o Sawanga-Loni, Tq. Warud, Dist. Amravati.

¶14

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

¶15

Mr. R.A. Bagde, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mrs. M.H. Deshmukh, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1. Mr. G.N. Shinde, Advocate for Respondent Nos.3 & 4. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

¶16

CORAM : VINAY JOSHI, J. DATE : 4 th OCTOBER, 2022.

2/3

9.cwp.509.22.jud

ORAL JUDGMENT :-

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.

¶21

02] The petitioners raised a challenged to the notice dated 20/06/2022 issued by the Police in terms of Section 149 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Code). By the said notice, the Police have prevented the petitioners from entering into the disputed agricultural land till adjudication of lis by the Civil Court. In other words, the Police have issued order of injunction restraining the petitioners from entering into certain piece of land. No doubt, the Police Officer can interpose for prevention of commission of cognizable offence, however, they cannot issue order having colour of injunction. Similarly, the Division Bench of this Court in its judgment in the case of M/s. Rai Udyog Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra & others – 2022 ALL MR (Cri) 2936 has expressed in paragraph 11 that while exercising power under Section 149 of the Code, the Police did not have the power or authority to issue order of injunction but the party shall approach to the civil Court. Thus, apparently the impugned action of the Police is not sustainable in the eyes of law.

¶22

03] Moreover, it is brought to the notice that the concerned land was owned by the petitioners’ father and respondent Nos.3 and 4 are the

¶23

3/3

¶24

9.cwp.509.22.jud

¶25

petitioners’ mother and sister respectively, who are claiming right over the property. It was informed that already the petitioners have filed civil suit seeking cancellation of documents of will, which is pending. In the situation, the Civil Court is the appropriate authority to decide the related dispute. However, by any stretch of imagination, the Police cannot restrain a party

¶26

under Section 149 of the Code from entering into the land.

¶27

04] In the result, the petition succeeds. The impugned notice dated 20/06/2022 is hereby quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute in the above terms.

¶28

(VINAY JOSHI, J.)

¶29

*sandesh

¶30

Signed by:SANDESH DAULATRAO WAGHMARE Private Secretary to the Hon'ble Judge Signing Date:06.10.2022 18:18

Narayan S/O Nattuji Hale and Another v. the State of Mha. Thr. Pso Ps Jalalkheda Tq.Narkhed Dist.Nagpur and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narayan S/O Nattuji Hale and Another v. the State of Mha. Thr. Pso Ps Jalalkheda Tq.Narkhed Dist.Nagpur and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ravindra S/O Vitthalrao Uike Vs Suresh S/O Rambhauji Agrawal

Dr. Vijaypat Singhania and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Mr. S.M. Saraf, Inspector of Legal Metrology

Arbind Kumar Jayaswal S/O Shri Basant Lal Shaw Vs Central Bureau of Investigation Thr. Investigating Office EO-1, New Delhi

Himanshu S/O Mahesh Shukla Vs Mrs. Gayatri W/O Himanshu Shukla

Kanchan W/O Gautam Kamble Vs the State Ofmah. Thr. Pso Ps Ajani Nagpur

Wazir Shah S/O Kasam Shah Vs Sheikh Mustaque Sheikh Isa