Madras High Court
Sampath vs . on 19 June, 2020
Author: P.N.Prakash
Bench: P.N. Prakash
Crl.R.C. No.571 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
RESERVED ON: 13.07.2020
DELIVERED ON: 14.07.2020
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.N. PRAKASH
Crl.R.C. No.571 of 2020 & Crl.M.P. No.4401 of 2020
1 Sampath
2 Rajendran
3 Chinnasamy
4 Devendiran
5 Mariyappan
6 Kumaresan
7 Govindan
8 Komaladevi
9 Chinnammal
10 Ranjithkumar
11 Chinnavan
12 Shanmugam
13 Sakthivel
14 Kishore
15 Mangammal
16 Sudha
vs.
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page 1 of 7
Crl.R.C. No.571 of 2020
1 The Sub-Divisional Executive Magistrate
and Revenue Divisional Officer
Dharmapuri
2 The State represented by the
Inspector of Police
Mathikonpalayam Police Station
Dharmapuri
3 S. Vediyappan
4 Kaliyappan
5 Selvaraj
6 Arumugam
7 Ravi
8 Muniyappan
9 Perumal
10 Ragavan Respondents
Criminal Revision under Section 397(1) and 401 Cr.P.C. seeking to
call for the entire records in connection with the proceedings of the first
respondent in Na.Ka.No.1196/2020/A2 dated 19.06.2020 and set aside the
same.
For petitioners Mr. Shankar
for Mr. A. Ilayaperumal
For RR 1 & 2 Mrs. P. Kritika Kamal
Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side)
-----
ORDER
Challenging the order dated 19.06.2020 passed by the Sub-Divisional Executive Magistrate and Revenue Divisional Officer, Dharmapuri, the first http://www.judis.nic.in Page 2 of 7 Crl.R.C. No.571 of 2020 respondent herein, (for short “the Executive Magistrate”) under Section 145 Cr.P.C., directing two warring groups, viz., “A” Party and “B” Party, to remove the idols and structures put up by them in Survey No.255/6 in Oongaranahalli Village, this criminal revision has been filed by Sampath and 15 others belonging to “B” Party.
2 Heard Mr. Shankar, learned counsel representing Mr.A.Ilaya Perumal, learned counsel on record for the petitioners and Mrs.P.Kritika Kamal, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for respondents 1 and 2.
3 Mr. Shankar, learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that the land in Survey No.255/6 in Oongaranahalli Village, was in the possession and enjoyment of one Chinnavan for over three decades and that the said Chinnavan had given the land to the members of the “B” party to install the deities of Nagathamman and accordingly, they installed the deities, which was objected to by the members of the “A” Party. According to Mr.Shankar, most of the members of the “A” Party were outsiders and out of sheer malice, they created trouble in order to prevent the members of the “B” Party from peacefully installing the deities for worship. He further contended that because of the trouble created by the members of the “A” Party, the Executive Magistrate, without proper enquiry, had passed the impugned order, which deserves to be set aside.
http://www.judis.nic.in Page 3 of 7 Crl.R.C. No.571 of 2020 4 Mrs. P. Kritika Kamal, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) refuted the contentions put forth by the learned counsel for the petitioners.
5 This Court gave its anxious consideration to the rival submissions. 6 A reading of the impugned order dated 19.06.2020 shows that the land in Survey No.255/6 is a village natham land as per the revenue records and is not a patta land. However, Mr. Shankar, learned counsel, disputed this assertion and submitted that the land was in possession of Chinnavan for over three decades and that the said Chinnavan had handed over the land to the members of the “B” Party for installing idols.
7 In the opinion of this Court, revenue records show that the land in Survey No.255/6 in Oongaranahalli Village measuring about 22 sq. mts. has been classified as a village natham and if the members of the “B” Party want to refute it, they have to approach only the Civil Court.
8 Mr. Shankar, learned counsel for the petitioners, contended that without passing a preliminary order under Section 145 Cr.P.C., the Executive Magistrate ought not to have passed the impugned order. This contention also cannot hold water in the light of the Full Bench judgment of this Court in A. http://www.judis.nic.in Page 4 of 7 Crl.R.C. No.571 of 2020 Dhaveethu and others vs. The District Collector, Sivagangai District1. That apart, this is not a case where the Executive Magistrate was called upon to decide as to who was in possession of a certain land before the alleged dispossession. In this case, the issue is that the members of the “B” Party had installed statues and deities and that had created law and order problem in the area and had prompted the “A” Party members to put up structure as a counter-blast. Therefore, the question of passing preliminary order will not arise in a case of this nature. After the members of the “B” party surreptitiously installed the statues and deities in the land, violence erupted and therefore, the district administration had to necessarily intervene.
9 Mr. Shankar, learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the Executive Magistrate, did not consider the complaint in CSR No.76/2020 that was given by the members of the “B” Party and had placed reliance only upon the FIR in Cr.No.57 of 2020 that was registered on the complaint given by Vediappan of “A” Party. There is no merit in this submission too, because, the FIR in Cr.No.57 of 2020 was a report given by the local Inspector, to the revenue authorities to intervene as the situation became explosive on account of quarrel between two groups. What is tested before this Court is not the genesis of the dispute, but, the propriety of the impugned order. This Court does not find any illegality or impropriety in the order dated 19.06.2020 passed by the Executive Magistrate calling upon the members of the “B” Party to 1 2016-2-LW (Crl.) 1 http://www.judis.nic.in Page 5 of 7 Crl.R.C. No.571 of 2020 remove the statues and further, calling upon the members of the “A” Party to remove the temporary structures put up by them in the Government natham land in Survey No.255/6 in Oongaranahalli Village.
In fine, this criminal revision is dismissed as being devoid of merits. Connected Crl.M.P. stands closed. It is open to the revenue authorities and police administration themselves to remove the statues and structures put up by the two groups and ensure that peace is maintained in the present COVID- 19 pandemic period, with an iron hand.
14.07.2020 cad To 1 The Sub-Divisional Executive Magistrate and Revenue Divisional Officer Dharmapuri 2 The Inspector of Police Mathikonpalayam Police Station, Dharmapuri 3 The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras http://www.judis.nic.in Page 6 of 7 Crl.R.C. No.571 of 2020 P.N.PRAKASH, J.
cad Crl.R.C. No.571 of 2020 14.07.2020 http://www.judis.nic.in Page 7 of 7