Land dispute case - The Legal Chamber

Supreme Court Clarifies Limits of SC/ST Act: No Prosecution Without Caste-Based Intent

18Aug

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Clarifies Limits of SC/ST Act: No Prosecution Without Caste-Based Intent

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the High Court's quashing of proceedings under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. It ruled that mere allegations of caste-based malice were insufficient without concrete evidence. The Court emphasized that prosecution under the Act requires proof of intent linked to the victim's caste, preventing misuse for personal vendettas. Legal infirmities in the complaint and lack of prima facie case justified the quashing under Section 482 CrPC. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from a land allotment dispute in Duvva village, where the appellant, Konde Nageshwar Rao, alleged that Respondent No. 2, the Mandal Revenue Officer (MRO), manipulated the allotment of plots reserved for Scheduled Caste (SC) beneficiaries to upper-caste ind...

Supreme Court Slams Fraudulent Litigation, Nullifies Compensation Order in Land Dispute

The Supreme Court held that judicial orders obtained through fraud are null and void, as "fraud unravels everything." It emphasized that suppression of material facts vitiates proceedings, regardless of the court's hierarchy. The doctrine of merger does not apply to fraudulent judgments. The Court recalled its earlier order and remanded the case to the High Court for fresh adjudication, affirming that fraud is an exception to finality in litigation. Procedural technicalities cannot shield fraudulent litigants from judicial scrutiny. Facts Of The Case: The case involves a dispute over land ownership and compensation between Vishnu Vardhan, Reddy Veeranna, and T. Sudhakar. The trio jointly purchased land in Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh, in 1997, which was later acquired by NOIDA in 200...

Supreme Court Quashes FIR in Land Dispute : Civil Dispute or Criminal Case?

The Supreme Court quashed an FIR under Sections 406 and 420 IPC, ruling that the dispute was purely civil in nature and lacked criminal intent. The Court condemned the misuse of criminal proceedings to pressure the appellants in a land deal, imposing ₹10 lakh costs on the complainant for abuse of legal process. It emphasized that contractual breaches must be resolved through civil remedies, not criminal prosecution, unless fraudulent intent is clearly established. The judgment reaffirmed the need for courts to prevent harassment via frivolous FIRs in commercial disputes. Facts Of The Case: The case involved appellants Mala Choudhary (a 70-year-old widow of an Army officer) and her daughter, who owned a 500-square-yard plot in Telangana. In 2020, they orally agreed to sell the land to a c...