Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 402 (GAU)

Muslima Begum Laskar v. State of Assam

2019-04-01

UJJAL BHUYAN

body2019
JUDGMENT : UJJAL BHUYAN, J. 1. Heard Mr. M.J. Quadir, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, learned Government Advocate, Assam. 2. Having regard to the grievance expressed by the petitioner and the order that is proposed to be passed, Court is of the view that issuance of formal notice is considered not necessary as the case may be disposed of at the motion stage itself. 3. Grievance of the petitioner is that she is the owner of a plot of land measuring 4 bighas 16 kathas covered by Dag No. 72 and 73, 73/768 and 73/770 of second R.S. Patta No. 25 under Barakpur pargana, Mouza- Dakhin Krishnapur within Silchar Sadar Police Station in the district of Cachar. Alleging that the 16 accused persons by use of force had grabbed her valuable property, she had lodged a complaint before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Cachar at Silchar, whereafter it was referred to the Silchar Police Station, following which Silchar P S Case No. 3879 of 2018 was registered under Sections 188/447/323/352/354/392/506/34 IPC, read with Sections 4/5 of the Assam Land Grabbing Prohibition Act, 2010. Petitioner has also instituted Title Suit No. 154/2018 which is stated to be pending in the Court of Civil Judge No. 2, Cachar at Silchar for declaration of her right, title and interest and confirmation of possession over the said land. 3.1. Petitioner has filed the present writ petition alleging that notwithstanding registration of the police case, no investigation has been carried out by the police till now and police has not even visited the place of occurrence. 4. The Assam Land Grabbing Prohibition Act, 2010 (Land Grabbing Prohibition Act) has been enacted to prohibit the activity of land grabbing in the State of Assam. As per the preamble to the said Act, there are organized attempts on the part of certain lawless persons operating individually and in groups to grab, either forcibly or by deceitful means, land belonging to the Government or public sector undertakings or local authorities or religious institutions or private persons. It says that it is necessary to arrest and curb immediately such unlawful activities of land grabbing which adversely affects public order. 5. While Section 3 declares land grabbing in any form to be unlawful and makes it a cognizable offence under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 4 prohibits land grabbing. 5.1. It says that it is necessary to arrest and curb immediately such unlawful activities of land grabbing which adversely affects public order. 5. While Section 3 declares land grabbing in any form to be unlawful and makes it a cognizable offence under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 4 prohibits land grabbing. 5.1. As per Section 7, there shall be special Tribunal for the purpose of enquiry into any alleged act of land grabbing and trial of cases in respect of ownership and title or lawful possession of the land grabbed and the Court of District and Sessions Judge having jurisdiction has been declared as the Special Tribunal for the purpose of Land Grabbing Prohibition Act, which includes Additional District and Sessions Judges. 5.2. Powers and functions of Special Tribunal are mentioned under Section 8 whereas procedure to be followed by the Special Tribunal are provided under Section 10. 5.3. Under Section 11, in a proceeding under the Land Grabbing Prohibition Act where the allegation is of land grabbing, Special Tribunal shall presume that the person who is alleged of grabbing land is a land grabber and the burden of proving that the land is not grabbed by him shall be on such person. 5.4. Under Section 12, any case pending before any Court or any other authority immediately before coming into force of the Land Grabbing Prohibition Act, which involves any act of land grabbing shall stand transferred to the Special Tribunal within whose jurisdiction the alleged grabbed land is situated. 6. A Division Bench of this Court in In Re: State of Assam; reported in (2018) 2 GLR 313, has held that the authority competent to enquire into and try the offence of land grabbing is the Special Tribunal. When it is a case of land grabbing exclusive jurisdiction is vested on the Special Tribunal. Role of police or any investigating agency is ruled out. 7. In V. Laxminarasamma Vs. A Yadaiah, (2009) 5 SCC 478 , which was a case relating to Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982, Supreme Court held that the Special Courts and Tribunals constituted thereunder indisputably are entitled to determine any question or issue including the question of title or possession in proceedings before it. 7. In V. Laxminarasamma Vs. A Yadaiah, (2009) 5 SCC 478 , which was a case relating to Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982, Supreme Court held that the Special Courts and Tribunals constituted thereunder indisputably are entitled to determine any question or issue including the question of title or possession in proceedings before it. That being the position and considering the mandate of Section 12 of the Land Grabbing Prohibition Act, the title suit instituted by the petitioner is also required to be transferred to the Special Tribunal, Cachar. 8. In view of above, Superintendent of Police, Cachar at Silchar, shall forthwith transfer the case record of Silchar P S Case No. 3879 of 2018 to the District and Sessions Judge, Cachar at Silchar, who shall, thereafter, assign the case before the Special Tribunal, Cachar at Silchar for expeditious investigation and trial. District and Sessions Judge, Cachar at Silchar shall also transfer the civil suit, i.e., Title Suit No. 154 of 2018 stated to be pending before the Civil Judge No. 2, Cachar at Silchar to the Special Tribunal. 9. With the above direction, writ petition is disposed of.