A Division bench of Madras High Court, comprising of Justices N. Kirubakran and P.D. Audikesvalu, has observed that Police had to perform its duties sincerely in execution of the Court orders and if the police is only exhibiting their inability to execute the Court's order then they were not eligible to hold the post as well.
"This Court is unable to understand as to how the police personnel are unable to give police protection to the Advocate Commissioner to enter upon the property. If the dogs were let loose, they should see to it that the dogs are controlled and action taken against the parties, who let loose the dogs. Instead of doing so, the police is only exhibiting their inability to execute the Court's order."
This observation was made while dealing with the matter pertaining to the measurement of property and Advocate Commissioner was restrained from performing her duties by the property owner and making hurdles in execution of the Court orders.
Factual Background
An Advocate Commissioner went to inspect the property to note down physical features and to take measurements of the property some people as per the High Court orders. The property owner protested against the Advocate Commissioner from entering into the property. Advocate Commissioner approached the Court for police protection.
The Court ordered for police protection to her. When the Advocate Commissioner went to inspect the property, dogs were let loose and nobody could enter into the property despite police protection. Therefore, the matters came before the Court.
Court Reasoning and Judgement
The Court reprimanded the Police officials and held that:
“The Court's orders have to be implemented / complied in letter and spirit. If the officials are unable to do that, they are unfit to hold the post that too, in a disciplined force, like police force. Therefore, 48 hours is given to the local police to see that conducive atmosphere is created for the Advocate Commissioner to enter upon the property and to take measurements and to note down physical features of the property as per the orders of this Court. That apart, the police shall identify persons, who are said to be in occupation of the property, their antecedents and who let loose the dogs. The police shall also ensure that the persons, who are all there in the property, hand over documents to the Advocate Commissioner in proof of their alleged title or alleged occupation. The entire inspection has to be video- graphed.”
The Bench issued the order and call this matter within 2 days of the order.
Case Details
Case: O.S.A.Nos.202 to 204 of 2020
Quorum: Justice N. Kirubakran and Justice P.D. Audikesvalu
Read Order@LatestLaws.com
Share this Document :Picture Source : https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRFZZr5OfftCnKzBqemUkTKbTPo1JbNZzSjRg&usqp=CAU
