Madras High Court
Valat Maha Vishnu Temple Trust vs The Revenue Divisional Officer/ on 22 December, 2020
Author: Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup
Bench: Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup
Crl.O.P.No.294 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Reserved On : 21.06.2022
Delivered On : 18.08.2022
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP
Crl.O.P.No.294 of 2021
and
Crl.M.P.No.161 of 2021
1.Valat Maha Vishnu Temple Trust,
Rep. by its Founder K.A.Sreedharan,
S/o.Achuthan Chetty,
Door No.2/158C-1, Valat Maha Vishnu Temple Premises,
Ambalamoola Post, Munnad Village,
Pandalur Taluk, The Nilgiris.
2.Valat Maha Vishnu Temple Trust,
Rep. by its Chairman P.K.Rajasekaran,
S/o.Late P.Kesavan Chetty,
Door No.2/158C-1, Valat Maha Vishnu Temple Premises,
Ambalamoola Post, Munnad Village,
Pandalur Taluk, The Nilgiris. ... Petitioners/B Party
-vs-
1.The Revenue Divisional Officer/
Sub Divisional Magistrate,
Gudalur,
The Nilgiris.
2.The Tahsildar,
Pandalur Post,
The Nilgiris.
1/15
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.294 of 2021
3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Devala Post,
The Nilgiris.
4.The Inspector of Police,
Devala Police Station,
The Nilgiris.
5.A.R.Ramachandran
6.Dharmarajan
7.V.T.Ramesh
8.V.Baskaran ... Respondents/A Party
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C, praying to call for records and quash the proceedings of the first
Respondent in Na.Ka.A1.3524/2020, dated 22.12.2020.
For Petitioners : Mr.R.Mubarak Basha
For Respondents : Mr.L.Baskaran
1 to 4 Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
For Respondents : Mr.V.Raghavachari
5, 6 and 8
For Respondent 7 : No appearance
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings of the first Respondent in Na.Ka.A1.3524/2020, dated 22.12.2020.
2/15 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.294 of 2021
2.The learned Counsel for the Petitioners Mr.R.Mubarak Basha submitted his arguments. It is the submission of the learned Counsel for the Petitioners that the Petitioners are the devotees of the Temple viz., Valat Maha Vishnu Temple. The devotees of the Temple had filed the suit in O.S.No.19 of 2018 on the file of the learned Sub Judge, Gudalur, seeking the relief of permanent injunction against the Trusties of Valat Maha Vishnu Temple Trust. The Trust is a registered public Trust. The learned Counsel for the Petitioners invited the attention of this Court to the averments in the plaint. A copy of the plaint is enclosed in the typed set of papers furnished along with this Petition. The relevant portion of the plaint is extracted as under:
“21.It is submitted that 2nd and 3rd plaintiffs with the assistance of other plaintiffs brought about the mismanagement of the temple properties and money by the defendants to the knowledge of the public after they came to know about the misappropriation and mismanagement of temple properties by the defendants on 23.09.2017. As an after effect pubics made demand for verification of accounts and documents, but it was denied by defendants. So on 06.10.2017 the defendants canvassed a meeting of all trust members and all defendants colluded together and made false allegations and accusations against 2nd and 3rd plaintiffs and demanded for their resignation and they were compelled to submit their resignation letter on 06.10.2017 to the second defendants in the presence of other defendants.”
3.In continuation of the dispute only, the suit was filed. The learned Counsel for the Petitioners submitted that the Petitioners had filed 3/15 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.294 of 2021 interlocutory application for interim injunction restraining the Trustees from managing, disposing, selling or removing any of the inventories, agricultural products, movable and immovable properties of “Valat Maha Vishnu Temple”, Ambalamoola Post, Munnanad Village, Pandalur Taluk, The Nilgiris and thus render justice. The Plaintiffs in the suit as Petitioners in the Interlocutory Application could not get any order from the learned Sub Judge, Gudalur. Then, they started troubling the Petitioners. Therefore, the Petitioners were compelled to prefer a complaint. The relevant portion of the complaint is extracted as under:
“The Trust is managing and maintaining the Temple and its property for the past 12 years, eversince its formation and harvesting of arecanut crops and other agricultural products are abs done, by the Trust, without any interruption or interference.
While so one A.R.Ramachandran and his Brother A.R.Dharmarjan, Ramachandran's Son Sree Renju in collusion with anti-social elements in the area, are holding out threats against Trust Members, with a motive of accomplishing their selfish interests and are interfering in the smooth functioning of the day to day affairs of the Temple and makes the threats of trespassing into the above said agricultural land belonging to Temple and thereby harvesting of ripened/matured arecanut crops, claiming that a petition for injunction namely I.A.No.7 of 2018 in O.S.No.19 of 2018, has been filed by them on 14th October, 2017, before Hon'ble Sub Court, Gudalur, against the Trust and Members. Though it passed 3 years, since their filing of the Suit for permanent injunction, no orders of interim injunction in their Interlocutory Petitions/applications, have been passed by the Court, restraining the Trust or its Members from managing the income, moveable or immoveable properties of the 4/15 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.294 of 2021 Temple, as prayed for. The Trust continue its absolute possession and enjoyment of the suit property and takes the income from agricultural produces, for the advantage of the temple.
We categorically state that above said individuals has no any manner of right, claim or title on the property of the Temple. Mere filing of a Suit, without any order or direction from the Court against the Trust and its Members does not confer them any right to prevent us from harvesting arecanut crops.
The above said Original Suit No.19 of 2018 stands posted to 10/12/2020 for hearing before the Hon'ble Sub Court and I am filing herewith case status report, in which no orders of court noted, for your kind reference and perusal.
As you know that on 30-11-2020 around 3.30 PM, the above said persons made an futile attempt to trespass into arecanut plantation of the Temple and attempted to prevent harvesting of arecanut crops and loot the agricultural produces. Because of your goodself's timely intervention and of your force, the attempt was thwarted and we could take away the harvested arecanut crops safely and market the same.”
4.Based on the above complaint, C.S.R. was issued by the Sub Inspector of Police, Ambalamoola Police Station. Subsequently, Crl.O.P.No.20645 of 2020 was filed by the Temple Trust against the District Superintendent of Police, The Nilgiris District and the the Sub Inspector of Police, Ambalamoola Police Statetion, as Respondents 1 and 2 not to harass the Petitioner and other Trust members and interfering with the harvesting of arecanut crops from the Temple land. Based on that, summons were 5/15 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.294 of 2021 issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Gudalur, dated 18.12.2020, for convening Peace Committee Meeting on 21.12.2020 at 03.00 p.m. as though there was law and order issue between the two groups. Subsequently a meeting was convened by the Revenue Divisional Officer between parties who are arrayed as “A” party and “B” Party viz., “A gphpt[ rhh;ghf fye;J bfhz;lth;fs;
1/jpU/A/R/uhkr;re;jpud;
2/jpU/jh;kuh$d;
3/jpU/unkc&;. tp/o 4/jpU/V/gh!;fud;
B gphpt[ rhh;ghf fye;J bfhz;lth;fs;
1/jpU/A/rz;Kfd;;
2/jpU/K.A._jud;;
3/jpU/K.P.Rnue;jpud;
4/jpU/P.V.gpughfud;
5/jpU/P.K.uh$nrfud;
Immediately the Petitioners had sent a complaint to the Collector of the Niligris District and the Superintendent of Police regarding the attempted interference by parties who are in no way connected with the Trust properties. The relevant portion of the complaint is extracted as under:
“Though the above said proceedings say about registering of a case under No.14/2020 under Section 107 Cr.P.C. Sub Divisional Magistrate-cum-Revenue Divisional Officer, instead of proceedings under Section 107 Cr.P.C., he arranged a “Katta Panchayat” under the pretext of “amaithi Kootam”, compelling the Parties to execute Bonds for keeping peace and tranquility, in advance. Nor a 6/15 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.294 of 2021 summons or show cause notice was served on us or no inquiry was conducted as contemplated in Criminal Procedure Code. Sub Divisional Magistrate-cum-Revenue Divisional Officer, obtained the Bonds in advance, branding the Parties as law breakers, without proceeding to inquire into the truth of information.”
5.Subsequently, a suit was filed by 1) V.Baskaran, S/o. Velu Chetty,
2) Dharmarajan, S/o.Ramakrishnan, 3) M.R.Subramanian, S/o.Raghavan, 4) V.T.Ramesh, S/o.Thangappan, 5) R.Rajarathinam, S/o.Rangaswamy, 6) V.R.Ajith, S/o.Rajappan against the Trustees of the Temple in O.S.No.7 of 2021. In paragraph 11 of the plaint in the said suit it is stated as under:
“11.It is submitted that, the 3rd defendant even though he is not a trustee in the above said trust, he self-proclaimed himself as the Chairman of Valat Maha Vishnu Temple Trust along with the 1st defendant as found of Valat Maha Vishnu Temple Trust filed a writ Petition before Hon'ble High Court Judicature at Madras bearing No.Criminal Original Petition No.294/2021 and Crl.M.P.No.161 of 2021 for quashing the order of Revenue Divisional Officer passed under section 107 Cr.P.C. in Na.Ka.A13524/2020 dated 22.12.2020. The Hon'ble High Court pleased to stay the order of Revenue Divisional Officer passed under Section 107 Cr.P.C. in Na.K.A13524/2020 dated 22.12.2020 until further orders on 11.01.2021.”
6.Wherein it had been stated that the Hon’ble High Court had pleased to stay the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer passed in Na.Ka.A13524/2020 dated 22.12.2020. The Respondent as Plaintiff also instituted a suit with ulterior motive to get an order of injunction from the 7/15 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.294 of 2021 Civil Court. No show cause notice was issued to the Petitioners. The Plaintiff had taken a new way as though public tranquility and breach of peace arose. The relevant portion is extracted as under:
“,e;j mikjp ngr;Rthh;j;ij TlY}h; rhh;g[ ePjpkd;wj;jpy; jhf;fy; bra;ag;gl;Ls;s mry;
tHf;F vz;/19/2018d; jPh;g;g[f;F cl;gl;ljhFk;/”
7.The learned Counsel for the Petitioner invited the attention of this Court to Section 111 of Cr.P.C. which is extracted as under:
“111. Order to be made - When a Magistrate acting under section 107, section 108, section 109 or section 110, deems it necessary to require any person to show cause under such section, he shall make an order in writing, setting forth the substance of the information received, the amount of the bond to be executed, the term for which it is to be in force, and the number, character and class of sureties (if any) required.” Accordingly, a bond was obtained from both the parties. The Respondent had not complied the bond.
8.The learned Counsel for the Petitioners, in support of his submissions, relied on the following rulings: 8/15
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.294 of 2021 8.1.In the case of R.Ramanathan -vs- The Sub Divisional Magistrate & Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirunelveli and another reported in 2013-2-L.W. (Crl.) 90.
8.2.In the case of Gurunathan and others -vs- Executive Magistrate and Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivakasi, Virudhunagar District and another reported in (2011) 1 MLJ (Crl) 511.
9.It is the submission of the learned Counsel for the Petitioners that the facts in the reported decision squarely applies to the facts in this case.
Therefore, he seeks to quash the proceedings in Na.Ka.No.5324/2020, dated 22.12.2020.
10.The learned Counsel for the Respondents Nos.5,6 and 8 submitted that this is a Public Trust. The entire community of Valat Mathavi Chettiyar shall be the Trustees of the Temple. The income of the Temple is used only for the payment as salary of the staff and for day-to-day management of the Temple. While so, some rowdy elements had entered into the property and 9/15 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.294 of 2021 attempted to get the arecanut trees for their own selfish interest. The Petitioners alleged to have created another society with ulterior motive as though Villagers as a whole protested. The learned Counsel for the first Respondent invited the attention of this Court to the written statement filed in the suit by the fifth defendant and adopted by others which reads as under:
“11.From time immemorial the daily rituals and other religious Festivals were conducted by the elders among the temple devotees. However, by the lapse of time the then elders were not able to manage the temple properties effectively and thus a Society has been registered for the proper management of the routine poojas, religious ceremonies and the management of the Temple properties. But as admitted by the plaintiffs in para 7 of the plaint the said society become DEFUNCT and there was no responsible individual or body of persons to look after the poojas to the Deity and the management of the temple Properties. If such circumstances let to continue the Temple will deprive of its movable and immovable properties and the daily poojas and other religious ceremonies will be disrupted.”
11.The Petitioners alleged to have created another society with ulterior motive. The learned Counsel for the Respondents Nos.5,6 and 8 Thiru.V.Raghavachari invited the attentions of this Court the notice of the Revenue Divisional Officer dated 18.12.2020 calling upon both the parties 10/15 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.294 of 2021 to appear before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Gudalur. In response to the proceedings of the Revenue Divisional Officer, the Respondents participated in the enquiry. After four days of the proceedings of the Revenue Divisional Officer, the Petitioners had issued a statement, a copy of the same is enclosed in the typed set of papers.
12.The learned Counsel for the Respondents Nos.5,6 and 7 invited the attention of this Court to the proceedings of the Revenue Divisional Officer dated 22.12.2020 wherein both the parties have participated. Notice by the Petitioners is misleading against the Respondents as though Respondents had misappropriated the funds. This Petition is nothing but misuse of the provisions to Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, this Criminal Original Petition is to be dismissed.
13.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) Mr.L.Baskaran invited the attention of this Court to the complaint lodged by the Petitioners to the Police. In continuation of the same, notice was sent to the disputing parties, enquiry was conducted by the Sub Divisional Executive Magistrate- 11/15 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.294 of 2021 cum-Revenue Divisional Officer. The Revenue Divisional Officer had passed orders vide proceedings dated 22.12.2020. The relevant portion of the said proceedings is extracted as under:
“,e;j mikjp ngr;Rthh;ji
; j TlY}h; rhh;g[
ePjpkd;wj;jpy; jhf;fy; bra;ag;gl;Ls;s mry; tHf;F
[ ;F cl;gl;ljhFk;/”
vz;/19/2018d; jPh;g;gf
14.The suit is pending. Pending suit, there had been rival claims for the property. Therefore, the extraordinary powers of the High Court cannot be exercised for quashing the proceedings of the Revenue Divisional Officer. Therefore, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submitted that the provisions to Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is misused by the Petitioner and hence, this Criminal Original Petition is to be dismissed.
15.On consideration of the rival submissions and on perusal of the proceedings of the Revenue Divisional Officer, dated 22.12.2020, it is found that the representation given by the Petitioners that the suit is pending between the parties before the Court of the learned Sub Judge, Gudalur was not at all considered. When the Civil Court is ceased of the matter, the conducting of a meeting as though there is breach of peace in the locality regarding rival claims is found to be non-application of mind by the 12/15 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.294 of 2021 Revenue Divisional Officer. The dispute is with regard to the harvesting of arecanuts in the land belonging to the temple. There are rival claims to the Trust which controls the temple. When that be the case, when the Civil Court is ceased of the subject matter and the dispute, the convening of the meeting on the guise of peace committee is unwarranted and uncalled for. If at all the dispute is to be resolved, the parties can approach the Civil Court for any urgent circumstances as the circumstances warrant. When both the parties are facing trial, both parties are bound by the orders of the Civil Court then the Revenue Divisional Officer has no jurisdiction. Therefore, based on the reported rulings in the ase of R.Ramanathan -vs- The Sub Divisional Magistrate & Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirunelveli and another reported in 2013-2-L.W. (Crl.) 90 and in the case of Gurunathan and others -vs- Executive Magistrate and Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivakasi, Virudhunagar District and another reported in (2011) 1 MLJ (Crl) 511, the proceedings initiated by the Revenue Divisional Officer in Na.Ka.A1.3524/2020, dated 22.12.2020 is liable to be quashed.
In the result, the Criminal Original Petition is allowed. The 13/15 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.294 of 2021 proceeding in Na.Ka.A1.3524/2020, dated 22.12.2020 on the file of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Sub Divisional Magistrate, Gudalur, The Nilgiris, is quashed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
18.08.2022 SRM Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No To
1.The Revenue Divisional Officer/ Sub Divisional Magistrate, Gudalur, The Nilgiris.
2.The Tahsildar, Pandalur Post, The Nilgiris.
3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Devala Post, The Nilgiris.
4.The Inspector of Police, Devala Police Station, The Nilgiris.
5.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
14/15 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.294 of 2021 SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP., J.
SRM Order made in Crl.O.P.No.294 of 2021 18.08.2022 15/15 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis