news details |
|
|
| A case of "disappearance" of land from police custody | | After HC issues arrest warrants against him, T Ngr police stn SHO visits "disputed" land to handover its possession to plaintiff | | Bharat Bhushan
EARLY TIMES REPORT
JAMMU, Oct 20: In a case of the "domineering" police allegedly assuming the role of accused and "defying" court orders issued a decade and a half ago, police today visited the land under the illegal occupation of a family at Trikuta Nagar to handover its possession to the plaintiff.
Twenty six years ago, a case was filed by Mulkh Raj that Fattu Hussain of Basant Vihar, Trikuta Nagar, had encroached upon his land.
Fattu has built a house on the "disputed" land. When Trikuta Nagar police station SHO, Inspector Abid Hussain Rafiqui reached there this morning, Fattu agreed to give possession of 18 marlas of land, under his occupation, to Mulkh Raj on the court orders.
Mulkh Raj, however, alleged that the piece of land, which was being handed over to him, actually did not belong to him. " On my land, Fattu is running a dairy," he claimed.
He said he was going to file a fresh petition in the court in this regard.
Though the possession of land could not be given to Raj today, Inspector Abid repeatedly told the plaintiff that "his job is only to help him get back his land on the court orders and not to demolish the rooms which have been constructed by Fattu on it."
Police would now visit the land Thursday and help the plaintiff in taking its possession.
The court of Ist class judicial magistrate, Jammu, ordered police on April 3, 1995, to deliver possession of the land to Mulkh Raj at Chhani Himmat (Trikuta Nagar extension).
The dilly-dallying police tactics for 15 years was obviously the manifestation of their remiss and own do's and don'ts.
Though wretched due to the long-drawn legal battle, and indifferent police, the despondent petitioner remained committed to take his struggle to the bitter end and moved the high court through advocate Anil Sethi.
His case got a new life when high court judge, Justice J P Singh directed Trikuta Nagar police station SHO to appear in person before the court in the first week of June as he was held guilty of contempt.
He observed that the possession of 2.5 kanals of land at Chhani Himmat was not delivered to the petitioner despite finality attached to the proceedings under section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Justice Singh said that during the pendency of proceedings in his court, the SHO was required to ensure compliance of the magistrate's order, which, however, had not been complied with.
"I do not find any merit in the submission of deputy advocate general B R Chandan appearing for police that the land in question has not been appropriately identified by the revenue agencies," he had stated in his order.
He observed that the police station functionaries were found remiss in the discharge of their duty to deliver the possession of the land, placed on their superdnama by the court, to the petitioner.
"The Trikuta Nagar police station SHO is directed to appear in person to show cause as to why proceedings in contempt be not initiated against him for not delivering the possession of the property which was placed on his superdnama, to the petitioner, complying with the April 3, 1995 order of the Ist class judicial magistrate," Justice Singh had said.
On his directive, the SHO filed the compliance report in his court Monday last.
Justice Singh directed the SHO to deliver the possession of 18 marlas of land, which in terms of the compliance report, the "petitioner is stated entitled to".
"Delivery of possession of land to the petitioner, shall remain subject to the orders of the court," he ordered.
In the case filed on September 21, 1984, Mulkh Raj alleged that his 2.5 kanals of land at Chhani Himmat had been encroached upon by Fattu.
On October 9, 1984, the court attached the property and kept it on the superdnama of Gandhi Nagar police station SHO under whose jurisdiction Chhani Himmat fell that time. After the carving out of a separate police station at Trikuta Nagar, the matter got transferred there.
On April 3, 1995, the court directed Trikuta Nagar police to actually hand over the physical possession of the land to Mulkh Raj.
However, it surprisingly took police 15 years to identify the land which was placed on their superdnama. In his petition, the complainant alleged that police role in his case was more of a "despotic" ruler than the protector of people and their properties. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
