The Supreme Court on Monday pulled up the Madhya Pradesh authorities for failing to use their statutory powers to ensure that a woman gets possession of land in a dispute involving political activist Govind Singh Rajput, observing that it was “shocking” that the State was unaware of the powers available to it.
The case concerns allegations relating to illegal occupation of land belonging to a Scheduled Tribe family, caste-based abuse and criminal intimidation. The petitioner is facing prosecution under provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, as well as provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
At the outset, the Court was told that an SIT had given Rajput a clean chit, while the High Court had subsequently sent the matter back to the Trial Court, observing that the SIT had not given him a clean chit. Counsel submitted that Rajput had consistently maintained that he was not in possession of the property and had placed an affidavit to that effect on record.
“
“I have already said, my Lord, I was not in possession, I am not in possession, I have given an affidavit. We have given an affidavit on record, my Lord, here before my Lords…I am not in possession, in future I am not interested in that land. I have very categorically said, what else I can do in bona fides, my Lord.”
Counsel submitted that the Collector had gone to the property along with the police and had taken possession, referring to the Collector’s affidavit filed before the Court. Counsel further submitted that the Collector’s affidavit stated that the action had been taken pursuant to an order of the Supreme Court.
The Court indicated that the relevant factual position would have to be acted upon and asked the authorities to ensure the woman’s possession. The Bench then sought to ascertain whether the State would have any objection to ensuring the woman’s possession of the property.
Counsel for the state responded that there would be no objection and that the authorities would abide by any direction issued by the Court.
The Bench specifically advised the concerned officer to invoke Rule 250 of the Land Revenue Code and directed that necessary steps be taken with the assistance of the Station House Officer.
“
“Actually advise your officer to invoke powers under Rule 250 of the Land Revenue Code. Please take necessary steps with the help of the SHO and ensure that she can have a boundary around her….As a State you are not aware of your power. This was something shocking before us…Statutory powers, there are certain sovereign powers. Use at least one of them and ensure that this poor lady gets the possession. Ask the police people to be there and take the possession and we will see the next aspect.”
The Court also dealt with litigation expenses payable to the woman concerned. It directed that ₹25,000 towards litigation expenses be deposited by the petitioner and released to her through the concerned District Legal Services Authority (DLSA). The Court indicated that routing the amount through the DLSA would ensure that it reaches her directly.