Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

V. POWER OF THE HIGH COURT TO COMMAND POLICE OFFICERS TO AID IN ENFORCEMENT OF ITS ORDERS:

Whatever be the view, regarding the power of the Civil Court to direct police officers to render assistance to enforce its orders, the High Court, undoubtedly, has the power to issue such directions. Article 226 is a part of the basic structure of the Constitution of India (L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India ), and the power conferred on the High Court thereunder cannot be negated or circumscribed even by an amendment to the Constitution, much less by legislation plenary or subordinate. Article 226 of the Constitution confers on the High Court wide powers in issuing writs for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III of the Constitution, and for any other purpose. Under the first part of Article 226 of the Constitution, a writ would be issued only after holding that the aggrieved party has a fundamental right, and that it has been infringed. Under the second part, a writ may be issued only after finding that the aggrieved party has a legal right, and that such a right has been infringed. (Rashid, K.S. v. Income-tax Investigation Commissioner ; State of Orissa v. Rungta ; Calcutta Gas Co. v. State of West Bengal ; K. Venkatachalam v. A. Swamickan ; B.A. Bhavani v. LAO, Yeluru Reservoir Project, Peddapuram ).

The Civil Procedure Code prescribes the procedure for execution of decrees passed by a Civil Court of competent jurisdiction. There is no provision therein for enforcement of orders of the High Court. The jurisdiction of this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution, is extremely wide, and the power to issue prerogative writs, orders or directions is not circumscribed by any limitation of its orders being required to be enforced only in execution proceedings by the Civil Court. Accepting this startling submission of the Learned Senior Counsel would mean that, while the High Court can issue writs, orders or directions and punish, those who disobey its orders, under the Contempt of Courts Act, it cannot enforce its own orders, and must depend upon the Civil Court to have its orders enforced. It would also require us to hold that the power of the High Court under Article 226, (which in view of its being a part of the basic structure of the Constitution cannot be negated even by a constitutional amendment much less by legislation (plenary and subordinate)), is implicitly limited by the requirement of having its orders executed by the Civil Court (again implicitly) under the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code. Neither has the Learned Senior Counsel referred to any statutory provision, nor to any judicial pronouncement, which requires the High Court to have its orders enforced only by the Civil Court. Such a far fetched submission does not merit acceptance.