The Allahabad High Court has recently reiterated that proceedings under the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 (PDPP Act) is not maintainable in cases involving alleged illegal encroachments on gram sabha land. The Court clarified that such disputes are to be addressed under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, through eviction proceedings before the revenue authorities.

The ruling came in a case involving the appellant Brahmdutt Yadav, who was subjected to criminal proceedings under Sections 3 and 5 of the PDPP Act following a complaint lodged by the local Lekhpal. The complaint alleged that Yadav, along with other nearby farmers, had encroached upon gram sabha land and caused damage to public property.

After a charge sheet was filed and summons issued, Yadav approached the High Court challenging the legality of the proceedings. His counsel argued that there had been a non-application of mind by the magistrate in issuing the summoning order and contended that the alleged encroachment should have been addressed under the Revenue Code, not through criminal prosecution under the PDPP Act.

Justice Saurabh Srivastava, presiding over the matter, quashed the proceedings, relying on a coordinate bench decision in Munshi Lal and Another v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another, where it was held that “as far as criminal proceeding for illegal encroachment, damage or trespass over the land belonging to Gram Sabha is concerned, the same can be undertaken but it would be subject to the adjudication of rights of the parties over the land in dispute, as the said determination can be done only by the revenue court.”

The Court observed that the PDPP Act was designed to “curb acts of vandalism and damage to public property including destruction and damage caused during riots and public commotion.” Applying this interpretation, it concluded that invoking the Act in cases of land encroachment, without proper adjudication of land rights, amounted to an abuse of the process of law.

The decision, dated April 15, reaffirms the jurisdictional limits of the PDPP Act and underscores the primacy of the revenue court in determining land ownership and encroachment issues.

Source Link

 

Picture Source :