Law in practice

CHAPTER SUBJECT PAGE
1. Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC)
a. Legal and Technical Points under Code of
Criminal Procedure ………………..……….
b. Examples …………………………..……….
i. Overloaded Iron-Ore Trucks…………
ii. Illegal Parking ……………………...
iii. Road Encroachment ……….………
2. Public Nuisance under Indian Penal Code
a. Introduction ……………………..………….
b. Commentary on Legal Provisions ………….
c. Examples ……………………….………….
i. Arrest Orders of District Education
Officer ………………….………….
ii. Arrest of Secretary Gram Panchayat
iii. Failure of Electricity, Irrigation,
Telephony etc ……………………….
08
08
13
13
18
21
22
22
22
24
24
25
26
1. Introduction …………………………………….
2. Legal and Technical Details …………………...
3. Example …………………………………………
a. Peculiar Situation ………………………..
b. Solution ………………………………….
27
27
29
30
20
1. Introduction …………………………………….
2. The Basics of the E C Act 1955 ……………….
3. Examples ……………………………………….
i. Trucks and buses running on Kerosene ……..
4. Legal Nuances ………………………………….
33
33
36
36
38
!
1. Introduction & Commentary
2. False Evidence
3. The Legal Zugzwang
40
42
42
"
# $ !
%
1. Introduction …………………………………….
2. Issues in Encroachment Removal ……………..
3. Encroachment Removal Methods …………….
4. Examples ……………………………………….
i. Karwar (Uttara Kannada District) ………….
a. Shops on Road in front of Bus Stand …...
b. Shopping Complex Overhanging a Road
c. Road Side Temporary Shops ……………
d. General Demolition ……………………..
e. Encroachment Removal in Taluk/Block Hq
f. Rehabilitation ……………………………
ii. Titlagarh (Bolangir district, Orissa) …………
iii. Baliguda demolition under section 133CrPC
46
47
47
47
47
48
48
49
49
50
50
51
53

2 | P a g e
iv. Encroachment Removal and 144CrPC ……..
5. The Salient Learning Points in Examples Above
i. Divide and Rule …………………………….
ii. Carrot & Stick ………………………………
iii. Time is the Essence …………………………
iv. Be Firm and Knowledgable …………………
v. Planning & Ability to think on-the-spot ……..
vi. Stubbornness ………………………………..
54
56
57
58
58
59
59
59
'
(
) *
1. 144 or 107? ………….
2. Illegal Raid ………….
60
64
+
,
% *
1. Introduction …………..
2. Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 …………..
3. Related Statutes ………….
a. Indian Penal Code ………….
b. Indian Evidence Act ………….
67
68
87
87
89

3 | P a g e
2.1 Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC)
The provisions relating to the Public Nuisance under the Code of Criminal
Procedure give wide ranging powers to the Executive, the full purport and
usage of which are yet to be fully understood and applied. These provisions
under section 133CrPC and other related sections of the Code of Criminal
Procedure can be used with telling effect in many administrative issues and
problems faced commonly. Many elements in the examples cited hereunder
are common to each other yet each case is dealt with in a self complete
fashion even at the cost of repetition.
Legal and Technical Points under Code of Criminal Procedure
The provisions for dealing with public nuisance under CrPC are contained in
section133 to section143. The FLOW CHART that briefly captures the
procedure for the same is given hereunder –

4 | P a g e
As per section 135 Respondent has to either obey
the conditional order by accepting and implementing
it or he must appear and show cause against the
order
Public Nuisance as defined under section
133CrPC sub-section (a) to (f) is found to have
occurred or caused - basing on police or other
information, by DM or SDM or an Executive
Magistrate (especially empowered to deal with
section 133))
CONDITIONAL ORDER calling upon specified persons
to carry out specified tasks or refrain from doing
something is passed under section 133CrPC. Served
on the concerned and these RESPONDENTS should
show-cause why the order be not made ABSOLUTE
Enclose reports based on which conditional order
has been passed along with the show-cause notice to
the Respondents
Seek another report (if deemed
necessary) from a local person under
section 139CrPC

5 | P a g e
As per section 141 once the order is made absolute under
section 138CrPC then the respondent must obey it and carry
out the directions contained in it failing which the respondent
is liable for criminal prosecution under section 188 Indian
Penal Code besides the Magistrate can get the said order
implemented through governmental agencies and RECOVER
the cost of removal of the said public nuisance from the
respondent through distress warrant sale of immovable or
moveable properties of the respondent
As per section 136CrPC, in case the respondent fails
to do either of the two as given in section 135CrPC,
then the order SHALL be made absolute and the
respondent is liable under section 188IPC as
commission of a cognizable offence
In case the public right is denied then under section
137CrPC, and, in case cause is shown through
suitable reply by the Respondent then under section
138CrPC; the Magistrate shall hold enquiry as in the
“summons case” and decide the case as per facts and
merits and either make the CONDITIONAL ORDER
absolute or modify it or make other suitable orders.

6 | P a g e
The following points of the order under 133CrPC need finer
appreciation –
1. The action under section 133CrPC can always be initiated if the
facts of a case require so notwithstanding any other legal remedies
that might be available to address the same. This position of law
has been up-held in numerous judgments in various Hon’ble High
Courts and even by Hon’ble Supreme Court. The case of Ratlam
Municipal Corporation is a famous one in this regard. For
example even when there are provisions under Municipal Zoning
Regulations and City Master Plan which prohibit opening of
industries in residential areas, the action under section 133CrPC
can also be initiated to control as well as proscribe such an industry
in a residential area. Another example could be that even when
action under Air/Water Pollution Control Acts could be taken still
As per section 143CrPC once an order is made absolute
under section 138CrPC and performed as per section
141CrPC, it can be ordered that it shall never be repeated.
In case the public nuisance is repeated again then action to
remove it can be taken against the respondent without any
further enquiry or opportunity to the respondent.

7 | P a g e
if situation so requires the action can also be taken under section
133CrPC and that also in addition to action under Pollution Control
Acts.
2. The order under section 133CrPC is always directed against
specified person or persons and cannot be directed against public
at large (like an order, say, under section 144CrPC)
3. The order under section 133 CrPC cannot be passed ex-parte or
without affording persons (against whom it is sought to be passed)
an opportunity of being heard. However, in case persons do not
turn-up or fail to submit replies within reasonable time (you may
specify it in your notice itself) AFTER SERVICE OF NOTICE, the
suitable order can still be passed with respect to such persons.
4. The initial notice is technically speaking a “CONDITIONAL ORDER”
asking the respondent to show cause why the same should not be
made ABSOLUTE.
5. The action under section 133CrPC can be initiated either on a
private complaint or official report or even suo-moto (in which case
take subsequent field report before passing the final order).
6. A report from local officers is advisable and can be the start point or
it can be subsequent additional field report.
7. In any case you can always seek report from local Executive
Magistrate/Tehsildar on facts of the case at hand before passing
suitable orders.
8. There is provision that in case a public nuisance ordered to be
removed is not removed within the time frame allowed for doing so
then the same may be removed through governmental agencies
and the costs of its removal recovered from the defaulter and in
case of non-payment recoveries can be effected through distress
warrants.
9. The action to remove public nuisance that the defaulter fails to
remove and recovery of cost of such a removal is in addition to any

8 | P a g e
criminal prosecution that can be launched under section 188 of
Indian Penal Code for violation of orders passed under section
133CrPC.
2.1.1 EXAMPLES
The following examples will give insight into real working of the section
133CrPC
(a) OVERLOADED IRON-ORE TRUCKS
Problem Description
In the coastal district of Uttara Kannada (also known as Karwar) in
Karnataka the incorrigible menace of overloaded iron-ore trucks had
wrecked havoc to the roads besides causing uncountable suffering due
to non-adherence to pollution control norms, endless road traffic jams
due to poor driving habits etc.
Everyday around 5000 trucks overloaded with iron-ore used to come to
the district for its onward export through two state ports (Belekere and
Karwar). Belekere accounted for inflow of about 4000trucks per day
while about 1000trucks reached karwar port everyday. Practically, both
Karwar and Belekere ports are on National Highway 17 (NH17). While
Karwar port is literally on NH17, Belekere port can be reached by
travelling for about 4KM on Belekere Village road off the NH17. The
yearly export turnover from these two ports was in excess of
Rs1500Crores.
The local groups filed a petition in the Court of District Magistrate
under section 133CrPC seeking control and regulation of these
activities. After detailed hearing final orders were passed on the matter
under section 133CrPC read with section 143CrPC.

9 | P a g e
PECULIAR FACT – THE ORDERS WERE NEVER CHALLENGED!!!
Solution
Two specific directions were passed under section 133CrPC read with
section 143CrPC in the matter –
(i) The truck owner or any of their agents shall not under any
circumstances do overloading of the trucks or ply them in
contravention of any of the pollution control norms anywhere in the
district
(ii) Other than the National Highways or the State Highways, the iron
ore loaded trucks shall not ply on any other road unless a team
headed by Executive Engineer PWD gives a certificate that the
concerned road is fit to carry iron-ore loaded trucks. In this context
the 4km stretch of Belekere village road connecting NH17 with
Belekere Port must be brought to a standard that is fit to carry iron-
ore loaded trucks within one month failing which the iron-ore truck
traffic must stop using the said road. The decision whether
Belekere road is fit to bear iron-ore loaded truck traffic shall be
based on the fitness certificate that the Executive Engineer PWD
shall furnish two days before the expiry of one month grace period
given to set right the said public nuisance (sub-standard road). The
cost of setting right the public nuisance of bad road caused by iron-
ore trucks shall be borne by the Iron Ore Exporters and/or Truck
Owners and they shall themselves execute the work (final fitness
certificate given by the Executive Engineer PWD).
IMPLEMENTATION
Road Usage
The bad road was not set right within the grace period of one month
and the respondents kept on beating around the bush. In fact, the
Superintendent of Police wrote a letter to the District Magistrate that he
ought to think like a Deputy Commissioner/Collector and not as District

10 | P a g e
Magistrate as stoppage of 4000trucks would create havoc to road
traffic. However, with help from the Regional Commissioner and
Inspector General of Police the issue was solved and within one day
after the expiry of the grace period of one month, the order was
implemented by the police and truck traffic going to Belekere Port was
stopped for about 50 days during which time the Exporters repaired
and renovated the concerned road and Executive Engineer PWD
issued a fitness certificate after which the truck traffic was allowed to
restart.
Overloading
The implementation of overloading prohibition point had a very
remarkable course
(i) The Regional Transport Officer (RTO) and Police were
instructed to check and seize overloaded iron-ore trucks in the
district.
(ii) In almost the very first check ten trucks were found to be
grossly overloaded (by as much as 100% overload) and were
seized from NH17. The Executive Engineer NH Division was
asked to urgently submit a report –
a. What was the extra amount (over and above the regular
maintenance expenses) that the NH Division had to spend
on maintenance of the road due to damages done to the
road due to overloading of the vehicles.
(iii) The Executive Engineer NH Division quantified this extra cost
of maintenance (solely due to damages to road due to
overloading) and it came to Rs30Crores per year (in the
district over the stretch of National Highway used by iron-ore
trucks).
(iv) The notices were issued to the truck owners for violation of
orders passed under section 133CrPC and it was ordered that
either they set right the public nuisance by actually repairing

11 | P a g e
the road within a period of one month (the work of repair must
start within a week) or they should deposit Rs30Crores (each
truck owner was asked to pay Rs3Crores per truck) to the
Executive Engineer National Highway Division. In case they
failed to do either of the two then their seized trucks would be
sold in public auction in order to recover the said costs of
removal of public nuisance under section 141 CrPC.
(v) The truck owners appealed to Hon’ble High Court of
Karnataka
(vi) The Government Advocate in the Office of Advocate General
Karnataka refused to defend orders of the District Magistrate
saying that imposing FINE of Rs3Crores on each truck was
beyond the jurisdiction of a District Magistrate and advised to
release the trucks.
(vii) The Government Advocates were shown the provisions of
section 141CrPC and informed that clearly there was no
financial limits on recovery of the COST of removal of public
nuisance and that it was not a FINE as claimed by the
Government Advocate. However, he did not budge from his
stance claiming that as a lawyer he knew better than the
District Magistrate.
(viii) In the Hon’ble High Court the Government Advocate stated
point blank that the District Magistrate (who was personally
present in the High Court) would himself defend the said
orders. As a result with permission of the Hon’ble High Court
the District Magistrate defended his own orders
(ix) At the outset the Hon’ble Judge said that he appreciated the
orders passed by the District Magistrate as it was the first time
anyone actually seriously tried stopping the Iron Ore filled
overloaded truck. However, the Hon’ble High Court stated that
prima facie the recoveries ordered looked high as there were

12 | P a g e
many other overload offenders as well and recovery was being
ordered from ten trucks only.
(x) The District Magistrate explained the legal stance as follows
a. The offence committed was a criminal one
b. The section 34 read with section 149 of Indian Penal
Code provides that if an offence is committed by more
than one person then each one of them shall be
punished as though it was committed by that person
individually.
c. In the given case ten offenders were caught and their
liability could not be diluted on the statistical ground that
there might be other offenders as well, as this would
amount to punishment on statistical basis rather than on
facts and hard evidence of the case. In any case the
criminal liability as per section 39 and section 149 of
Indian Penal Code is full and individuals are punishable
as though the crime had been committed individually.
d. However, it was submitted that in case the Hon’ble High
Court permitted then the punishment could be given
basing on the statistics of number of overloaded vehicles
in the previous years thereby apportioning the liability of
each offender based on statistical assessment.
(xi) The Hon’ble High Court appreciated the point and ordered that
the said statistical basis could be used and there upon every
time the crime of overloading was committed by any truck the
recovery should be made on the spot as per the said
calculations.
(xii) This way the Hon’ble High Court upheld the recovery of
amounts EVERY TIME overloading was done and using the
statistical figures of the previous years each truck had to pay
about Rs50,000/- each time they might be caught with

13 | P a g e
overload.(in the original scheme of the recovery could only be
made once in a year from a given truck and not everytime the
said truck committed overloading)
(b) ILLEGAL PARKING
Problem Description
In Baliguda Subdivision in Kandhamal Distict of Orissa the universal
phenomenon of unauthorised parking on the road and road side
especially by the commercial vehicles (buses, trucks, mini buses,
commercial jeeps, three wheelers etc) was a rampant phenomenon.
The situation in cities and towns was very frustrating as people on the
road competed with the animals, all types of vehicles and each other
for space to move on the road. Yet, there was nobody to enforce basic
traffic discipline. Now, unlike Municipal Corporations and Police
Commissionerate, the small cities and towns do not generally have
standing orders wherein traffic violations can be imposed a fine on the
spot by the police. The usual procedure of forwarding such cases to
the Courts etc does not create adequate deterrence and is too tedious
to be implemented by the police force which is anyway miniscule
(compared with thousands of square kilometres of its jurisdiction).
Solution
The orders under section 133 CrPC read with section 143CrPC (why
this additional section was used is explained later) were issued
prohibiting the unauthorised parking of vehicles on the SPECIFIED
ROADS. The practice of carrying passengers more than the prescribed
limit set for a vehicle was also prohibited under section 133CrPC read
with section 143CrPC.
Implementation
Once the order had been passed then every time a vehicle was found
parked obstructing any traffic on the road the police or tehsildar would
seize it and bring it to the police station and issue notice (which was

14 | P a g e
pre-photocopied) that the said vehicle was found to be causing
“PUBLIC NUISANCE” and the said public nuisance was removed at
the government expense by removing it from the busy road and the
accordingly Rs1000/- (rupees one thousand) was incurred as cost for
removing the said public nuisance and same should be deposited with
Tehsildar against proper receipt failing which the said cost of Rs1000/-
would be recovered by distress warrant auction sale of the vehicle.
All persons paid up to get the vehicles released and the same was put
in the proper head of account.
Achievement
A quick and on the spot punishment of offenders was achieved which
considerably reduced the menace of illegal road parking of vehicles.
Details of Issuance of Order
1. The local Tehsildar and local Police were verbally asked and they
independently (separately) submitted written reports detailing the
problem of unauthorised parking by vehicles on SPECIFIED
ROADS as well as over loading of passengers and that these
actions had created a PUBLIC NUISANCE as defined under
section 133CrPC.
2. As the action under section 133CrPC can be initiated only with
respect to specified persons and cannot be directed against
the public at large and any order can only be passed after serving
notice on these persons (seeking their replies on the proposed
action under section 133CrPC) and giving them opportunity of
being heard. Hence, the Tehsildar and Police submitted list of
persons who were either actual or potential defaulters in this regard
as a part of their reports. In all about 700 plus notices were issued.
3. More than 700 separate cases were opened and technically
separate orders were passed. This was done with an aim that just
in case one or few of the respondents went to higher courts for

15 | P a g e
appeal or stay still only the relevant case would be affected and any
“stay orders” would affect only one or few cases and not all of them.
4. The Bus Owners Association, Truck Owners Association, Jeep
(Maxi Cab) Owners’ Association and all owners of the area who
were known to have commercial vehicles were issued individual
notices. The notice basically stated that act of parking their vehicles
on the public road (duly specified in the notice by way of list of such
public roads – National Highways, State Highways, Major District
Roads etc by name) is an act causing public nuisance and they
should not cause the said public nuisance.
5. The respondent to such notices are required by law to either admit
the existence of the public right or deny it. At the second stage, in
case they admit the public right, the only plea they can take is that
they have not caused any curtailment of the said right. Naturally,
the respondent can deny the existence of the public right and then
can claim there is no question of curtailment of public right (which
does not even exist in his opinion).
6. In the case at hand nobody could deny the existence of “PUBLIC
RIGHT” over a public road. In fact, not more than 5 to 6 persons
actually replied – their reply was to state that they did not do
unauthorised parking on any public roads.
7. After the due date fixed for hearing the orders were made
ABSOLUTE and final and unauthorised parking (regular as well as
temporary was ordered to be stopped).
8. The section 143 CrPC provides that when an order under section
133CrPC is being passed it can be ordered that the said public
nuisance once removed (as per orders under section 133CrPC)
shall not be repeated. In case it is repeated then the said repeated
nuisance can be removed immediately without any further notices
etc. Hence, it was furthered ordered under section 143 CrPC that

16 | P a g e
the public nuisance of parking vehicles at unauthorised spots
should not be repeated.
(c) ROAD SIDE ENCROACHMENT
Problem Description
This problem needs no description and all across the country
temporary, semi-temporary and even permanent structures are erected
on the road margins. Most of these semi-commercial structures are
technically speaking on the government land (for example the width of
the National and State Highways is, generally, not less than 200feet
and even when this width is the government land still illegal structures
are erected). In any case the National Highways Act and
corresponding provisions for the State Highways (including Hon’ble
Supreme Court judgment on the matter) has stipulated NO
CONSTRUCTION ZONE upto 40Meters (about 130feet) from the
centre of these roads and this provision of law is regularly violated.
Naturally, this causes grave accidental hazard and is a big “Public
Nuisance”.
Solution
The orders under section 133CrPC read with section 143CrPC were
passed ordering removal of the public nuisance by removing these
illegal structures on the road margins. It was ordered that in case the
same was not removed then the removal would be done by the local
Police and Tehsildar and the cost of removal would be recovered from
the concerned person.
Implementation

17 | P a g e
The road side encroachments which posed menace to traffic and were
directly or indirectly were removed by Tehsildar together with the police
and in all these cases either Rs500/- or Rs1000/- was recovered from
the offenders.
The highlight of implementation was removal of small kiosk (public
notary) on the road edge belonging to a lawyer and recovery of
Rs500/- from him for the said removal. The said kiosk was removed
and kept with the police and notice issued to the said lawyer that the
public nuisance caused by him through the said kiosk had been
removed and the all the items and others were kept with the police and
in case the cost of Rs500/- incurred in the said removal of the public
nuisance was not paid by him within a week then the same would be
recovered by distress warrant sale of the seized properties.
Achievement
A quick and on the spot punishment of offenders was achieved which
considerably reduced the menace of illegal road parking of vehicles.
Details of Issuance of Order
Identical as that for illegal parking of vehicles on the road. All the points
covered for issuing orders for illegal vehicle parking were observed in
this case as well.
2.2 Public Nuisance under Indian Penal Code
2.2.1 INTRODUCTION
Indian Penal Code defines “Public Nuisance” under section 268 and
section 290 IPC provides punishment for committing offence of public
nuisance. This is a NON-COGNIZABLE offence, however, if such an
offence is committed in view or presence of an Executive Magistrate
(including District Magistrate and Subdivisional Magistrate) then the
offender can be arrested upon orders of the Executive Magistrate
under section 44 of CrPC.

18 | P a g e
2.2.2 Commentary on Legal Provisions
1. As per section 268 IPC – any action or illegal omission which
causes common injury, damage or annoyance to the public or
to the people in general who dwell or occupy property in the
vicinity or which must necessarily cause injury, obstruction,
danger or annoyance to persons who may have occasion to
use any public right – is PUBLIC NUISANCE and an offence
under the said section.
2. The section 268 IPC clearly states that merely because some
benefit is derived by someone due to an action cannot be a reason
to excuse a common nuisance and the same remains punishable.
3. The vast ambit of this provision is obvious.
4. Section 269 to Section 289 provide for punishment for specific
public nuisances.
5. The section 290 IPC states that any kind of Public Nuisance for
which punishment is not provided for in any other section of the
Indian Penal Code can be punished under section 290IPC with a
fine which may extend to two hundred rupees.
6. Now, clearly education is a public right and teachers posted in a
school serve this public right
7. The action of sending them away on deputation to another school
clearly creates PUBLIC NUISANCE to students and their families of
the original school who have a public right to get education and this
public right is compromised by actions of illegal deputation of
teachers. Hence, offence of creation of Public Nuisance by the
District Education Officer had been committed under section
290IPC.
8. Now, a mere fine of Rs200/- may look meagre but when
commission of this offence is read with section 44CrPC (Code of
Criminal Procedure) then one finds that since act of deputation of
teachers is an act of CONTINUOUS COMMISSION OF OFFENCE

19 | P a g e
until the said deputation is revoked, hence, District Magistrate or
SDM or even Executive Magistrate can have the offender arrested.
9. The section 44CrPC states that subsequent to the arrest the person
should be dealt with as per provisions of law. When acting under
section 44CrPC it is best to order the local Police Station In-charge
Inspector/Sub Inspector to arrest the offender and then proceed to
deal with the case as per provisions of law. Technically, your role
ends here and police should deal with the case virtually treating
your order as an FIR (if offence is a cognizable one) or a simple
Non-FIR case (in case the offence is non-cognizable one and then
giving bail to the offender and releasing him) as the case may be.
10.As a matter of fact the police remain confused as to how to deal
with a person arrested under section 44CrPC and in all probability
they will produce him to you. You can simply pass an order to
produce him to relevant Judicial Magistrate and act as per law.
2.2.3 EXAMPLES
This provision is really useful in some circumstances as the following
examples will illustrate.
(i) Arrest Orders of District Education Officer
Problem Description
Malkangiri in Orissa is a tribal majority district (more than 60%
of the total population of the district is tribal) and the worst
affected from Naxalism (22 police officers and men gave
supreme sacrifice for the Nation there in the year 2003 alone) in
Orissa.
However, even such extreme circumstances are misused by
certain persons. During the transfer season the primary school
teachers were transferred in a most transparent and fair fashion.
This was done essentially using Pupil-Teacher Ratio (PTR) and

20 | P a g e
the asymmetrical distribution of teachers among the schools
was set right by sending out many teachers from town schools
to the interior schools (based on the PTR).
The District Education Officer subsequent to the orders of
transfers of the teachers, illegally and in contravention of the
written directions of the State Government, modified large
number of those transfers by ordering “DEPUTATION” of
teachers to their choice postings. It was reliably learnt that this
was done by accepting illegal monetary gratification from those
teachers.
Solution
Hence, as per legal provisions explained in paragraph 2.2.2 the
orders to arrest the District Education Officer under section
44CrPC were issued by the District Magistrate Malkangiri to the
local Sub Inspector (Police Station In-Charge) with a direction to
deal with the District Education Officer as per law subsequent to
effecting the arrest.
The full departmental proceedings were also initiated against
the officer by District Magistrate by writing to the government.
Implementation
The District Education Officer immediately absconded and went
to Hon’ble High Court of Orissa to obtain an anticipatory bail in
the case. The same was denied to him by the Hon’ble High
Court. Therefore the District Education Officer had to surrender
in the local Court.
He was also placed under suspension by the Government for
his misconduct and disobedience of government instruction as
he did unauthorised deputation of the teachers.
(ii) Arrest of Secretary Gram Panchayat
Problem Description

21 | P a g e
The Gram Panchayats used to distribute PDS (Public
Distribution System) rice and other essential commodities in
Malkangiri district. In one case the GP Secretary did not
properly distribute the PDS rice to the eligible beneficiaries and
complaints were received of misutilisation. They were found to
be correct upon enquiry done in the field.
Solution & Implementation
In order to demonstrate that any of derailment of PDS would not
be tolerated, the District Magistrate used section 290 read with
section 268 IPC and section 44CrPC and the Gram Panchayat
Secretary was arrested through Police Station In-charge by
such an order under section 44CrPC for causing derailment of
PDS and committing offence of public nuisance thereby.
The departmental action was separately taken up.
(iii)Failure of Electricity, Irrigation, Telephony etc
Problem Description
There are many a situations wherein the pubic service is
callously not set right and the concerned authorities behave
insensitively.
Solution & Implementation
It may not be advised to go ahead and arrested all such
persons. However, whenever it is found that even with the
personal intervention of the District Administration in these
matters the concerned officer or the authority show scant regard
to set right the problem affecting the common public; then in
such situations notice to show-cause why their arrest under
section 44CrPC should not be ordered for committing offence of
public nuisance under section 290IPC, is good method to
ensure responsive action from these authorities.
This generally works and ensures the best possible response
(the usage must be judiciously made for public causes affecting

22 | P a g e
common man so as not to create a dead-lock in the district and
end up getting accused as being high handed)
Introduction
The security proceedings under Chapter VIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure
(CrPC) [section 107 to section 124] are perhaps the most visible face of
magisterial powers of executive, coming next to only section 144CrPC, in their
wide impact on public at large.
Now, unlike section 144CrPC, the security proceedings empower an Executive
Magistrate to order preventive arrests (section 113CrPC). This power, perhaps,
is the epitome of visual power for which District Magistrate or a Sub-divisional
Magistrate or an Executive Magistrate are known. However, this power needs to
be exercised with proper procedure and knowledge as well as the facts and
circumstances of the case.
A casual approach in this regard has resulted in many a strictures being passed
against the Executive Magistrates by the Hon’ble High Courts, at the same time a
thorough and professional approach means that an Executive Magistrate can
prevent and control many potentially serious law & order and violent situations. In
fact, properly used these provisions can be exercised to imprison a person upto
one year.

23 | P a g e
This chapter attempts to provide you with the said understanding through
practical examples as well as theoretical foundations
Legal and Technical Details
1. The security proceedings under chapter VIII of CrPC are aimed at
preventive action and taking bond from those who are likely to commit
breach of peace, or a cognizable crime or habitually commit crime, not to do
so.
2. In case of default the surety can be imprisoned and/or the amount of bond
can be forfeited to the State.
3. However, in case a person fails to give bond to the satisfaction of the
Executive Magistrate, the said person can be imprisoned upto one
year (under section 122CrPC) or six months (under section 116CrPC)
unless in the meanwhile he gives such a bond to the satisfaction of
the Executive Magistrate. (section 116CrPC and section 122CrPC).
4. The flow chart of possible action under security proceedings is given below
Section 107: A bond
(with or without
sureties) is taken for
keeping peace upto one
year time from a person
who is likely to create
breach of peace in an
area
Section 110: A bond
(with or without
keeping good behavior
for upto three years
from person who is a
habitual offender in an
area
Section 108: A bond
(with or without sureties)
is taken for good
behavior by not
distributing seditious
literature upto one year
time from a person who is
likely to do so in an area
Section 109: A bond
(with or without
good behavior upto one
year time from a person
who is likely to commit
cognizable offence in an
area
! " ! !
#! #!
$ # % #
# &
"
' %

24 | P a g e
EXAMPLE
) *
& "
" '
" "
+
+
,- . * /
+ &
0!" 1 # .
+ &
#
+
'" )
2- %
$ 1" )3+ )4 563
!
" # 7
4 " &
& # 4
-"
1"
!
2"
1"
* " " #
7 # /
#

25 | P a g e
At Raikia block HQ in Baliguda sub-division of Kandhamal district of Orissa, there
was a large piece of government land of about 3acres in the heart of town and
was most suited for a bus stand for the town. At the same time the land grabbers
with their lands around the said piece of land wanted to grab it. One such land
grabber with an evil eye on this land was one Mr Behera, who also happened to
be a lawyer by profession.
A young IAS officer, who joined there as SDM, cleared the said piece of land
from internal encroachments including the fencing of Shri Behera and he ordered
that the said piece of land be immediately converted into a bus stand. Mr Behera,
fearing that his only chance of grabbing the said land was vanishing away,
incited and got filed a writ petition in Hon’ble High Court from local Gram
Panchayat members against the order of SDM arguing to the effect that the said
piece of land was regularly used as weekly market and the SDM had unilaterally
tried converting it into a bus stand. An order to maintain “status quo” as on the
day of passing of the order was ordered by Hon’ble High Court.
Peculiar Situation
In view of order of “status quo”, it was apprehended and intelligence also
revealed that Mr Behera was mobilizing everyone to conduct weekly market in
the said piece of land. This was a mischievous attempt by Mr Behera to create a
new “status quo” as the weekly market had been running in the Agriculture
Produce Marketing Committee yard since many years.
Solution
As Mr Behera was not one of the litigants in the writ petition filed in the Hon’ble
High Court, he could be targeted without attracting adverse opinion of the
Hon’ble High Court. The following was done
• A report was obtained from local tehsildar as well as police that Mr Behera
was out to physically (along with other vested interest groups) prevent
weekly market in the APMC yard and was organizing groups with intent to
break peace and tranquility of the area in order to achieve his objectives.
A grave and serious threat of break-down of law & order and

26 | P a g e
apprehension of breach of peace had occurred due to activities of Mr
Behera requiring urgent preventive actions.
• It was further written in the said reports that grave and urgent situation of
breach of peace had arisen and unless immediate arrest of Mr Behera
was done the maintenance of peace could not be ensured.
• Accordingly, arrest and production orders under section 113CrPC were
issued by the SDM to both police and local tehsildar. Along with the arrest
orders, show-cause notice under section 111CrPC read with 107CrPC
and report based on which the action was proposed to be taken was also
enclosed along with the arrest-cum-production warrant.
• The local Station House Officer of Raikia town Police station effected the
arrest and brought Mr Behera to the court of SDM at 11AM
• As per section 113 read with section 107, 114 the whole case was
explained out to Mr Behera and at once enquiry under section 116 was
started.
• Mr Behera was ordered to execute an INTERIM BOND of same type as
the main bond together with surety pending the finalization of the enquiry
under section116CrPC
• However, rather than replying and contesting the show-cause notice, Mr
Behera said he was willing to give the requisite main bond along with
surety to keep peace.
• Accordingly, the enquiry under section 116CrPC was completed by 1PM
on the same day and Mr Behera was ordered under section 117CrPC to
furnish the requisite bond along with surety by 5PM on the same day. Until
furnishing of the said bond along with surety Mr Behera was to remain in
police custody as per section 122CrPC.
• The case was again taken up at 5PM on the same day and surety and
bond given by Mr Behera was examined under section 121CrPC and the
surety was rejected.
• Mr Behera was given further time until 8PM on the same day to give
suitable surety and bond as per orders passed under section 117CrPC.

27 | P a g e
• The case was again taken up at 8PM on the same day (as a special case
since liberty of person was involved) and again the furnished surety was
rejected after examination under section 121CrPC.
• Mr Behera was imprisoned and sent to sub-divisional jail under special
orders of SDM to take him even after the SUN SET as otherwise, without
orders of SDM – the chairman of sub-division jail committee, post sunset
prisoners could not be taken inside the jail.
• Mr Behera was supposed to remain in jail as per section 122CrPC until he
furnished a surety and bond as ordered to the satisfaction of the SDM or
one year (whichever came earlier).
• However, eventually surety and bond furnished by Mr Behera’s advocate
after three days of him staying in jail was accepted and Mr Behera was
released.
• In the meanwhile the weekly market was successfully conducted at APMC
yard as usual and standing and capacity of Mr Behera to foment trouble
got so badly hit that he was never able to create any future troubles for the
administration.

28 | P a g e
!
"" #
INTRODUCTION
The Essential Commodities Act, 1955, is one of the most used and applied
pieces of legislation in the early career years of an IAS officer – coming next only

29 | P a g e
to the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) in this regard. Again, this is a welfare
legislation aimed at ensuring FOOD SECURITY. The soul of welfare initiatives –
the Public Distribution System, functions on the solid foundations of this
legislation. Hence, mastering its basics is prime requisite for running good and
people oriented administration.
Legally, the EC Act 1955, is a very interesting law and has many unique features.
For example, this Act provides for what ordinarily would look like double jeopardy
or two punishments for the same crime/act. But actually it is not so. This Act
provides for both criminal (under section 7) and civil punishments (under section
6A) and creates confusion even in the most experienced legal minds as though
there are two punishments for the same crime/act. Briefly, the criminal
prosecution is launched against the offender under section 7 of the Act in the
Court of Judicial Magistrate while under section 6A the involved essential
commodity and the vehicles/godown etc are confiscated to the state by the
Collector. Both of these actions proceed in parallel.
This chapter will capture the essential legal and procedural aspects of the EC Act
1955 and then the practical examples are given bringing out the uniqueness,
strength and application of this law.
THE BASICS OF THE E C ACT 1955
1. The law provides for regulation of storage, transportation, licensing,
handling of the “essential commodities” with an aim to ensure food security
and their smooth supply of essential commodities to public at large including
prevention of hoarding and black marketing.
2. The section 3 of the Act provides that Central and State Government may
declare any commodity to be the “essential commodity” and then proceed
on to pass an “ORDER” regulating its storage, sale, transportation etc.
Examples are Public Distribution System Control Orders, Kerosene and
Motor Spirit Control Orders, Wheat & Rice Control Orders (since repealed)
etc.

30 | P a g e
3. The Food & Civil Supplies Department as well as police & Tehsildars are
empowered to enforce this law.
4. The FLOW CHART of action for confiscation by Collector (or Sub-Collector
or Assistant Commissioner) under section 6A of the EC Act 1955 is given
below for better understanding and brevity.
Any Control Order issued under section 3 is violated
The essential commodity and/or vehicle, godown etc
is sealed and seized and given on ZIMMA to police
(do not allow zimma to the owner except that of the
godown or building) by enforcement officers
A report of seizure and violation of the Control Order
(the specific control order violated must be
mentioned) is submitted to the COLLECTOR who
may inspect the seizure or cause it to be inspected
In case the Collector is prima facie satisfied about
the violation of the Control Order, he should initiate
CONFISCATION Proceedings under section 6A of
the Act to confiscate the seized Essential
Commodity and/or the Vehicle, Godown, etc
Immediately, a show cause notice under section6B
of the Act should be issued to the violator as well as
the vehicle/godown etc owner, asking them to show
cause why the seized essential commodity and/or
the vehicle/godown should not be confiscated to the
state. Fix hearing date in this notice itself
In case the essential commodity is liable to speedy
decay or it is expedient in public interest to do so

31 | P a g e
then the Collector may pass interim order of its
disposal/sale and the sale proceeds be kept in
proper head of account. When the confiscation
proceedings are finally decided then, accordingly,
this money would be dealt with.
Upon reasonable opportunity having been given to
the Respondents to give their replies; the
confiscation proceedings should be decided by the
Collector. However, ordinarily the case must be
decided within 45 to 60 days (two hearings)
It is a good practice to order confiscation of both the
essential commodity as well as the vehicle and
godown to create proper atmosphere for respect for
law.
IMPORTANT – In case the confiscation is ordered
under section 6A, then the aggrieved party may
appeal under section 6C of the Act. However, in
case the confiscation is NOT ordered then this order
of the Collector is not appealable at all.
Note – As per section 6E, no Court or tribunal etc
can interfere with any interim or other orders passed
by the Collector while dealing with confiscation
proceedings (only option with the party is to appeal
under section 6C AFTER the confiscation has been
ordered or a WRIT to Hon’ble High Court)
5. The police launches criminal prosecution against the violator of the
Control Order under section 7 of the Act and the same is basically aimed
at securing conviction and consequent imprisonment of the offender. The

32 | P a g e
confiscation proceedings under section 6A by Collector go on un-affected
by this prosecution.
EXAMPLES
The following examples will bring forth the real life situations in which the EC Act
1955, can be utilized and enforced and the issues that crop in doing so –
Trucks and buses running on Kerosene
Problem
At Titlagarh in Bolangir district of Orissa, incredible it might sound, the
buses and trucks regularly ran on pure unadulterated kerosene illegally
black marketed out of Public Distribution System. The idea was that the cost
of damage to the engine was much less than the money saved in using
kerosene instead of diesel (in any case the financed buses were never
repaid and after a few years junk could be seized by Banks to “recover” their
dues)
The District Zilla Parishad President also happened to be Bus Owners’
Association president and ran many such buses.
Solution
The solution was to seize as many of these trucks and buses and never
release them and ultimately confiscate them to state under section 6A of the
EC Act 1955.
It worked!! Albeit with lot of learning points
Implementation
1. The buses and trucks found using kerosene as fuel were checked and
they were seized in case they were found to be using PDS Kerosene
(which has characteristic blue colour while non-PDS kerosene is
colourless liquid). Zimma was given to the local police station.
2. Four bottles of seized Kerosene were filled up and sealed on the spot
and sent to Collector who in turn sent one sealed sample to the
Authorised Petroleum Corporation for testing and reporting.

33 | P a g e
3. The procedure for confiscation proceedings as given above was
adopted and proceedings for confiscation of the Kerosene as well as
the bus/truck was started.
4. As an interim measure the bus or the truck were ordered to be
released upon deposit in proper head of account an amount equaling
the market value of the bus or truck (generally, this used be around Rs
3 to 5 Lakhs). No bank guarantees etc were accepted at all to
release the seized bus or truck
5. Even though the E C Act 1955 under section 6E clearly bars
jurisdiction of any Court or Tribunal from interfering with any order
(interim or otherwise) passed by Collector while acting under section
6A; yet, invariably, the interim order giving release of the truck or bus
upon deposit of Rs5Lakhs was challenged in Sessions Court under
section 372CrPC (appeal) or under section 397 CrPC (Criminal
Revision Petition). In all such cases the Hon’ble Sessions Court was
prayed that as Collector acting under section 6A of the E C Act is
NOT a “Criminal Court” as defined under the CrPC, hence, there lie
no appeal or criminal revision petition against any order passed by the
Collector under the E C Act. Only an appeal lies as per section 6C but
only AFTER the order of confiscation had been passed.
6. As per the report of Petroleum Corporation and evidence and report of
Food and Civil Supplies Corporation both the Kerosene and the
bus/truck were confiscated to the state after two hearings and
recording of the evidence.
LEGAL NUANCES
The EC Act, 1955, in proviso to section 6A, provides that 7% #
" # " # " #
" " # " # #
# " " &

34 | P a g e
8 " # " #
# 9
2. Hence, each of these truck and bus owners using this provision could
argue that only the cost of the seized kerosene should be taken from
them and their vehicle should not be confiscated. This point was
solved in the most ingenious way – a method which until writing of this
chapter has never been questioned in any court of law.
3. The “market price” that vehicle owner can pay in lieu of confiscation
was interpreted to be the market price of the vehicle and not that of the
essential commodity. So it was offered to the vehicle owner that he
could pay the market price of the vehicle (RTO would fix it) in lieu of its
confiscation.
4. Secondly, it was stated that in this case at hand the truck or bus was
not a vehicle in as much it was not transporting the kerosene to any
place, instead it was essentially a receptacle of the black marketed
PDS kerosene and was, as such, not entitled to any benefit of the said
proviso to pay market value in lieu of confiscation of the bus or truck.
5. The Respondents mischievously or due to lack of knowledge went in
appeal under section 372 or criminal revision petition under section
397 of CrPC to Sessions Court against orders of interim release of the
bus or truck. Strangely, many a times the Sessions Court admitted
these appeals/revision petitions. In all such cases the Hon’ble
Sessions Court was respectfully prayed through the Public Prosecutor
that as Collector is not a Criminal Court and proceedings under section
6A were not criminal proceedings; therefore, no appeal under section
372 or criminal revision petition under section 397 could be invoked by
the affected party. Moreover, as per section 6E such intermediary
orders of the Collector could not be interfered with by any Court or
Tribunal at all.

35 | P a g e
$
% &
(section 193 Indian Penal Code)
Introduction & Commentary

36 | P a g e
The Sub-divisional Magistrate (SDM) is, generally, the very first posting of an IAS
officer. This post is a combination of continuation of learning process and first
time real hands-on experience of running the administration. In this tenure the
IAS officer deals with provisions like section 144CrPC orders to prevent urgent
breach of peace or tranquility. Also, he deals with other provisions of CrPC to
handle law & order and also the preventive proceedings contained in the CrPC.
He also extensively deals with land revenue and related matters.
The following incident is very interesting and educative as to how one may face
legally tricky situations in real life and how adequate knowledge of law helps one
to deal with them. This chapter deals with one such situation about action under
section 144CrPC and issue of False Evidence arising therein.
The Sub-divisional Magistrate – a young IAS Officer, was posted as Sub-
Collector (Sub-divisional Magistrate – SDM) at Titlagarh Subdivision in Bolagir
District of Orissa. The story of government land encroachment here was no
different. In fact, without fear of contradiction, it can be said that the story of
government land encroachment is a universal phenomenon in India. The facts
are eerily similar across the country. The encroachments in urban areas are
particularly unpardonable but found everywhere.
Titlagarh is relatively bigger and commercial town in the backward region of KBK
(Kalahandi-Bolangir-Koraput) which after visit by the then Prime Minister Shri
Rajiv Gandhi had come to acquire special focus of the Planning Commission of
India.
There was large scale illegal encroachment of government land in Titlagarh.
Therefore, during the brief posting period of 7-months the SDM went about
ruthless demolition of illegal occupations of government lands in the urban areas
of Titlagarh subdivision. The details of this drive are a subject of another chapter.
In this context, one strand of government land encroachment was where the
heads of a religious institution had constructed many shopping complexes on the
religious land and had rented them out to private persons and were fully
pocketing the rents for their personal use. By the way, this misuse of properties

37 | P a g e
of religious and social organisations by their managers is again a universal
phenomenon in India.
One fine morning while the encroachments were being marked on the road, the
SDM came across these shopping complexes which were partly encroaching the
public drains. The shopkeepers in these complexes simply refused to cooperate
in markings and clearing of the road encroachments. The SDM realised that
these complexes were, in fact, government property (through Endowment Deptt)
and he was the Chairperson for the said land and temple authority. The SDM
immediately ordered and got all these complexes and the shops locked under
lock and seal.
Solution
The group of persons who were sevayats of the religious institute immediately
approached the SDM and tried all possible tricks – request, prayers, threats (both
physical and legal) to get the shops opened. The SDM said that only possible
idea was that the persons who actually ran the shops could become tenants of
the Endowment Deptt. These shopkeepers despite all threats by the Sevayats,
finally, at 2:30AM (in night) agreed and immediately entered into agreement with
the SDM who was the Chairman of the Temple Trust. The Sevayats threatened
that they did not accept any such agreements and would enter upon the land
which they claimed was theirs.
The SDM, immediately, got the survey revenue map prepared of the land and
passed orders under section 144CrPC prohibiting the Sevayats or anyone else
from entering upon the said land and shops. In the order the basis of the order
was stated that this group of men (he named all of the Sevayats who had come
to him) had themselves revealed to the SDM that they would enter upon and
occupy the said government land.
The said order was served on the police on the same night and was well
enforced and government land was fully and actually recovered.
False Evidence

38 | P a g e
The Sevayats who were all lawyers by profession were smarting under the loss
and filed a petition to the SDM stating that one of the person stated to have come
and revealed the design to enter upon the said land was a dead person. As the
report of this had been given to the Court of SDM by the SDM himself, hence,
naturally, the said information and evidence used as a basis to pass the orders
under section 144CrPC was a false one. Hence, the Sevayats prayed that the
SDM should take cognizance of commission of the offence of giving FALSE
EVIDENCE to a court against himself. Then as per provisions of the section 193
Indian Penal Code the case of FALSE EVIDENCE should be sent for trial and
cognizance to the Judicial Magistrate.
The Legal Zugzwang
1. The section 195CrPC stipulates that no Court shall take cognizance of
offence of FALSE EVIDENCE (under section 193 IPC) unless the
complaint is given in writing by the PUBLIC SERVANT or the Court to
whom the false evidence is submitted. In this sense the prayer of
Sevayats was technically correct one.
2. Now, in case the SDM ordered on the prayer that no false evidence was
in submitted by the SDM; then there was a chance that Sevayats would
go to Hon’ble High Court against the said order on the ground that the
SDM was being a judge in his own case and, thus, there was violation
of Principles of Natural Justice. It could be argued by Sevayats that the
order on the issue should be passed by someone other than the SDM
himself.
3. This point of Principles of Natural Justice was a strong one. However, in
case the orders were not passed by the SDM on the said prayer
imputing False Evidence, then also Sevayats could approach the
Judicial Courts stating that even though prayer had been submitted to
the SDM, yet no orders were being passed by the SDM on the matter
due to ill-intent.
4. Hence, it was a legal ZUGZWANG (damned if you do and damned if
you don’t).

39 | P a g e
Solution
The solution to the mischievous petition lay in pre-empting the mischief. The
party had to be beaten in their own game. This is how it was achieved
(i) There is a Register of Applications with each Court or a Public Authority
dealing with hearing of cases. This register is also the Register to
record the petitions received by the Court or the Public Authority
everyday. This has to be maintained every day by the relevant staff. But
it is hardly ever maintained regularly. So the result is there is no way a
party can prove that on a particular day a particular petition was filed
unless the said petition is entered in the said register.
(ii) The SDM called the said register and checked and found (as expected)
that enteries had not been made for many days. In any case, no
enteries had been made on the day when the said petition was filed.
(iii) The SDM got the said register up-dated albeit without reflecting the
filing of the said petition. The result was that there was no proof what-
so-ever that indeed such an application had been filed.
(iv) The original petition was retained by the SDM so that in case,
somehow, there could be some proof of filing of the said petition with
Sevayats then it could always be argued that the said petition was mis-
sent in the office and, hence, not entered in the proper register.
(v) The SDM knew that as per section 64 of Indian Evidence Act, the proof
of any document had to be direct. That is, the original document
(petition) had to be produced to prove that it existed. No photocopy etc
is admissible as evidence to prove the existence of such a petition.
Naturally, when the SDM himself had the original petition, nobody could
have produced it to prove that indeed such a petition existed.
(vi) The section 64 Indian Evidence Act has to be properly appreciated in
the sense that in case a party in any Court proceedings claims
existence of any document then the only way to prove that such a
document exists is to produce to the Court the original document itself.
In absence of the original document (private one) being produced, the

40 | P a g e
production in the Court of the photocopies or any other kind of evidence
to prove that such a document exists is not permitted. In other words in
order to prove the existence of any document that a party may claim to
exist, the Courts are barred from entertaining and admitting in evidence
anything other than the original document (in this case petition) itself;
(vii) The SDM then got a report from his Tehsildar stating that the names of
one of the persons mentioned was a dead man and that the said names
were given by Sevayats. The said report was made part of the case
record.
(viii) Now, based on this report of Tehsildar, the SDM issued a show-cause
notice to all the Sevayats that the names given by them in the said case
turned out to be false one and, accordingly, they had given false
evidence to the SDM in the said case. This made all the Sevayats liable
for criminal prosecution under section 193 IPC read with section
195CrPC.
(ix) Immediately, the tables had been turned against the mischief makers.
The Sevayats rushed to the SDM and argued that they had petitioned
against the SDM to the same effect and that petition should be taken
up. They objected that, instead, the show-cause notice had been issued
to them. The SDM informed them that no such petition had been
received. However, the Sevayats were free to give another of such
petition if they so desired.
(x) The new petition that Sevayats submitted was shown to be in reply to
the show-cause notice and it was disposed off stating that the said
petition was merely to shift and shirk the blame. The reply to the show-
cause was rejected and false evidence case against Sevayats sent for
trial to the Judicial Magistrate.
(xi) It was also stated in the order that action under section 144CrPC was
not a judicial order at all. It is an ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER. This
position of law has been well established through numerous judgments
of Hon’ble Supreme Court and Hon’ble High Courts.

41 | P a g e
The Sevayats were never heard from thereafter.
'
( ( ) # * + +
Introduction

42 | P a g e
Encroachment of public and government land is a universal phenomenon in
India. It is so rampant that it needs no introduction. It can be stated that with
number of encroachers of government land (even non-agricultural lands) running
into tens of thousands in each district, any serious attempt to address it entails
real and grave law & order apprehension.
One of the better ways of understanding the problem is to delineate it into the
following categories –
(i) Encroachment of public roads, drains, and footpaths.
(ii) Other type of encroachment of government land
Another useful way to categorize the encroachment problem is –
(i) Encroachment of government land for commercial purposes (including
all types of public road encroachments)
(ii) Encroachment of government land for purely agricultural purposes by
marginal farmers.
(iii) Encroachment of government land by poor in rural areas and urban but
non-commercial government lands for residential purposes.
This categorization is very useful as, at least, in the first category of
encroachments of government land an IAS officer has to be ruthless. This is
actually possible and the following pages of this chapter gives some of the real
life methods which have almost always successfully removed the encroachments
WITHOUT CAUSING Law & Order or any substantial dislocation.
Issues in Encroachment Removal
The following are the problems that one has to deal with while trying to do
removal of encroachments –
(i) Political interference on behalf of encroachers
(ii) Court stay orders obtained by the encroachers by all sorts of wrong
submissions and affidavits to the courts.

43 | P a g e
(iii) Potential law & order
ENCROACHMENT REMOVAL METHODS
The methods that have successfully worked in the field are given below. The real
life examples are narrated one after the other and at the end the learning points
are captured and brought out. The examples may look random actions at first but
there is a pattern and method to them which is revealed through the analysis at
the end explaining as to why the success was achieved.
Examples
1. Karwar (Uttara Kannada District)
(a) Shops on Road in front of Bus Stand
In Karwar – the district headquarters of Uttara Kannada district, in
otherwise exceptionally well laid out town there were some stark
encroachments on the main road opposite the town bus stand. The
enquiries revealed that though attempts were made to remove those
illegal shops but there were “stay” orders from the courts. It was a Friday
evening and the DM obtained the relevant files from the Municipal
Commissioner and AS USUAL found that so called “stay” had expired
years ago. The Municipality lawyer was called and asked whether any
latest stay was there with him. There was none.
As the municipality had already completed the eviction formalities and
there was no stay from any court. The shop owners were told verbally
that they must vacate the shop if they wanted as the shops would be
demolished starting 6AM the next morning.
As the number of shops was merely three and police was mobilized, a
clinical operation in the morning cleaned the whole road encroachment
in about one hour. Something unnecessarily pending for years was
achieved in a matter of few hours as clerks’ word that there was a “stay”
order was not believed by the DM and verification revealed the truth. The
land behind the road encroachment was of the municipality as well and
the said land was immediately utilized to construct a small commercial

44 | P a g e
complex thereby eliminating any chances of road encroachment
opposite the bus stand in future as well.
(b) Shopping Complex Overhanging a Road
The word spread quickly and on the very next day a petition was filed to
the DM stating that a big shopping complex owner was constructing a
shopping complex by projecting the shops on higher floors over the
public road. Immediately, the Municipal Commissioner was called with
the sanctioned plan and deviation from the sanctioned plan was
revealed. An over-night notice was issued by the Municipal
Commissioner to remove the unauthorized portion of overhang failing
which the same was to be demolished by the municipality. No
compliance was done. As a result on the very next day at morning 6AM
the extended portion’s demolition started. All requisite labour and
instruments were deployed. The police bandobast was made. The owner
of the shopping complex tried interfering with the demolition but an FIR
was filed against him under section 186IPC and relevant provisions and
he was arrested on the spot and taken to police station. The demolition
continued.
The shopping complex owner approached the local civil court and tried
obtaining a stay which was vehemently opposed by the municipality’s
lawyer and the court ordered sending of Court Commissioner on the
same day to get a report on claims and the counter-claims made in the
court. As a result by 2PM, even as the demolition was going on, the
court commissioner was on the spot making his report. As the law and
facts were on the side of district administration, a correct report was
submitted to the court on the next day. All this time the demolition
continued.
The court got the truth and did not give any interim relief to the shopping
complex owner and in two days of continuous demolition the
unauthorized part of the structure was demolished.

45 | P a g e
This really sent the right message to everyone – if you are on the wrong
side of law, there is no escape.
(c) Road Side Temporary Shops
The next item to be addressed were numerous petty and other
temporary shops which were there all over the road sides in and around
the city. The Municipality verbally informed all these shops owners on
Friday to remove their illegal structures and they were given time until
Sunday to themselves comply with the instruction. Many complied –
primarily due to enforcement that had been done against the big
shopping complex owner which had created a general atmosphere for
compliance.
The rest of such shops were demolished on an early morning drive on
Sunday.
Police bandobast was made by writing to the police by the Municipal
authorities.
(d) General Demolition
Subsequent to completion of above drives, the Karwar city survey maps
of revenue department were culled out and Tehsildar together with
Municipal authorities and the Survey wing of revenue department were
given ONE MAIN STREET and they marked EACH and EVERY building
as per survey maps there which were encroaching the public road. A
notice under Karnataka Municipalities Act 1964, was issued on Friday
giving them one day’s time to clear the public road encroachment failing
which the authorities would do the demolition.
In view of the strong atmosphere of compliance created through strict
enforcement, most of the encroachers removed their movable items from
the illegal portions and started demolishing in right earnest themselves.
In any case in a demolition with slab-cutters and compressor machines
and through a continuous action of two days the whole street was
cleared of road encroachments.

46 | P a g e
This strong and impartial action created adequate circumstances that
thereafter, the District Administration only had to mark a street as per the
revenue survey maps and the people would cooperate by removing the
movable items and demolition would be done by most of the times by the
encroacher himself and in remaining cases the municipality would
employ machinery to demolish.
(e) Encroachment Removal in Taluk/Block Hq
The step-by-step method of marking one street to start with and
completing the removal of encroachment The District Magistrate or the
Sub divisional Magistrate did the first main demolition in a taluk/block
headquarters and thereafter, the other streets and public roads were
taken up of public road there, followed up by similar action on another
road as stated above was employed with 100% success rate and without
any law & order erupting in any of the demolitions.
(f) Rehabilitation
The name of those whose shops were fully demolished in the drive were
noted down in a transparent and correct fashion and in the a suitable
commercial government land the Municipality started Commercial
Complex and these affected persons had an OPTION to take a shop on
COST basis. However, wherever the applicants for rehabilitation were
more than the number of shops being constructed in a given phase then
lottery system was adopted to shortlist. Moreover, the allotment of shops
among the applicants was done using a lottery system as well.
This way more than 3000 illegal structures were partly or fully demolished
2. Titlagarh (Bolangir district, Orissa)
A young IAS Officer joined as Sub-divisional Magistrate in Titilagarh in
Bolangir district and he was also placed as Administrator of local
municipality as the whole municipality was vacant (due to election boycott
by all the voters nobody had contested the elections). The town of
Titilagarh was a typical town with rampant encroachment of large extent of

47 | P a g e
government lands on and around the roads. The government land
opposite SDM office was illegally encroached by semi-permanent shops.
The whole encroachment was tackled as follows
(i) Tehsildar had already ordered the eviction under the Land Revenue
Law (Orissa Prevention of Land Encroachment Act), though the
encroachers were likely to go to a civil court in case any idea of a
demolition reached their ears.
(ii) Hence, on a Saturday the SDM went to this site of encroachment
with a VOLUNTARY vacation nama along with a clear message
that in case they did not sign it on the spot then the eviction would
be done on the immediately as per eviction orders of Tehsildar
(which was already passed and ready for implementation)
(iii) The VOLUNTARY vacation nama contained the following clause –
! " !
# "" "# $ % !
& # " & # '
& & # " ( &
## # #)*
(iv) This carrot and stick policy ensured that EVERYONE signed the
vacation nama. The benefit of this vacation nama was that
NOBODY could approach any court subsequent to signing of the
same. In fact, for a few persons who did approach civil court even
after signing the voluntary vacation nama their cases were
SUMMARILY rejected by the courts.
(v) The next day the shops were fully demolished and land handed
over to the Municipality for DEVELOPMENT of the town. Now,
within a week’s time construction work for Shopping Complex was
started by the Municipality.
(vi) As is always the case here also the encroachments were
haphazard and a well laid out shopping complex better utilized the

48 | P a g e
space which was previously encroached. Hence, for 30 shops
demolished, about 60 could be constructed on the same piece of
land.
(vii) The process of offer of allotment of shops to the rehabilitation group
was completed as soon as the construction of shopping complex
started. As stated above all these persons were called in a general
meeting and shopping complex layout plan was shown to them.
The group had already been divided into two groups basing on the
size of the shop they had lost – SMALL SHOP and NORMAL
SHOP. Chits bearing the shop numbers (separate for the two
groups) were put in a box and allotment letter offered as per
drawing of lots. The money required to be paid was equal to the
cost of construction of the said shop (calculated based on per
square foot basis). The shop was given on licence to run basis on a
monthly licence fee and the money given was refundable upon full
vacation of shop.
(viii) The rest of the shops were auctioned off for monthly licence.
However, while the monthly licence fee was fixed, the auction was
on the Fixed Deposit (or “pagri” in private parlance) that the bid
winner would keep with the Municipality to earn the right to run the
shop. This money was also refundable upon full vacation of the
shop. However, no refund was to be made for the first two years.
(ix) Kindly note that even though the moneys are refundable but only
on full vacation of the shop. Now, in case in the year 2000 a shop
fetched a deposit of Rs50000/- then it is almost sure to get more
than Rs50000/- after more than 2years if put to auction again.
(x) The public road got widened also as the Municipality constructed
the Shopping Complex with proper SET BACK and parking spaces.
(xi) The 30 shops were allotted to all the 30 evicted persons on COST
of CONSTRUCTION basis (individual shop was allotted based on
lottery)

49 | P a g e
(xii) The rest of 30 shops were auctioned and huge profits were made
by the Municipality.
(xiii) The shopping complex was completed in record 3 months’ time and
possession given to both the rehabilitation and auction allottees.
The same method was adopted one after the other on all the government
commercial land and public road encroachments in the town. The result was –
(a) Wider encroachment free public roads with NIL public road encroachment
in Titlagarh town.
(b) Return of government land to the government
(c) Creation of more than 250 shops in a span of about 5 months. The
construction was done out of the auction and rehabilitation money. In fact,
Rs2Crores were generated as surplus out of the ventures.
(d) Creation of a source of income for the Municipality which was initially
unable to pay even regular salaries to its employees. The Municipality
started earning Rs1.25Lakh per month out of monthly rents alone.
3. Baliguda demolition under section 133CrPC
The provisions under section 133CrPC and “public nuisance” can be used
to remove public road and drain encroachments and the same was
adopted by the Sub-divisional Magistrate in Baliguda, Kandhamal district,
Orissa. Please, see the chapter 2 Public Nuisance for details of this
example.
4. Encroachment Removal and 144CrPC
This is a connection which is very rarely, if ever, used by District
Magistrates or Sub-divisional Magistrates. The basic idea is that once
eviction has been done, it is a good practice to order prohibitory orders
under section 144CrPC against those who have been evicted as it
ensures the following –

50 | P a g e
(i) The party is adequately discouraged to again attempt and enter
upon the government land as in such a case a criminal case under
section 188 Indian Penal Code can be booked and the offender can
be arrested.
(ii) The implementation and enforcement report of the police of the
said order becomes a clinching and independent proof that indeed
the party has been evicted from the said land. Hence, even if the
party goes to a civil court, the revenue authorities can prove the
fact of eviction through additional report of the police (besides its
own case records) and no “stay” or “status quo” order would benefit
the encroacher.
(iii) In some cases where the eviction is done while retaining the
structures or the trees etc then the order under section144CrPC is
extremely useful in ensuring that party does not physically again
enter the government land
The following example brings out above mentioned points –
(A) As is the case in many private coffee plantations, Rakesh had a coffee
plantation running over a 210acres of area and he had further
encroached adjoining government land to an extent of about 70acres
in Baliguda subdivision Kandhamal district which falls on the Eastern
Ghats in Orissa.
(B) The young IAS SDM referred to the records and field survey reports
and found the facts as stated above.
(C)However, though the eviction had been ordered by Tehsildar G.
Udayagiri under Orissa Prevention of Land Encroachment Act, but
actual eviction had not been carried out.
(D) Naturally, the physical eviction of coffee plants that were spread all
over the encroached government land was not easy. It was obvious
that once the eviction started, Rakesh would either obtain a stay order
from a local civil court or get some political help to halt the eviction (by
misrepresenting the facts on the ground).

51 | P a g e
(E) The SDM along with his Tehsildar, survey wing, labourers and survey
poles and wire-mesh went to the spot. Then at the spot itself he got the
survey poles planted as per the actual survey and got the wire-mesh
mounted on the poles. He got the Tehsildar to draw a spot
panchanama to the effect that eviction had been completed and land
taken back to the government control. The relevant reports were
prepared and made part of the case record (eviction file) by Tehsildar
and survey wing along with maps. On the spot, together with the wire-
mesh and poles installation, a notice board was fixed clearly
announcing the completion of the eviction process. The party
deliberately did not turn-up (otherwise, the encroacher’s signatures
could be taken on the eviction report) and, hence, spot panchanama
was drawn up and also put on a notice on the spot.
(F) The SDM immediately (within one hour of eviction) got a report from
Tehsildar about the whole eviction exercise along with the documents.
The Tehsildar report contained a grave apprehension that the
encroacher Shri Rakesh or others on his behalf were bent upon
entering upon the reclaimed government land and were needed to be
prohibited from doing so. Therefore, based on this report, immediate,
ex-parte, orders under section 144CrPC were promulgated by the
SDM prohibiting Shri Rakesh or anyone else from entering upon the
said government land for a period of two months. The orders were
issued to the local police with a copy to Tehsildar. The police was
spoken to and they went to the spot immediately and promulgated the
orders along with Tehsildar and red flags were planted as sign of
issuance of prohibitory orders on the said land.
(G) A report of compliance was obtained from the police of proper and
strict implementation of the prohibitory orders passed under section
144CrPC. This was marked to Tehsidar and made part of the case
record proving unequivocal eviction of the encroacher.

52 | P a g e
(H)The Revenue Inspector and local revenue officials were instructed to
visit the land everyday to ensure actual non-entry of the encroacher
into the land taken back to the government (together with the coffee
plantation standing thereon)
(I) All this ensured that even if the encroacher went to a court and got
either a “stay” or “status quo” order, no benefit would accrue to him.
Again, any politician calling in to help the encroacher could always be
told that the eviction process was already over.
(J) The central theme was that the whole exercise was over in a few
hours.
(K) A similar action was done on a land encroached by a rich person who
had constructed a large number of houses on government land and
then given them out on rent to others. All houses were taken to the
control and ownership of the government and prohibitory orders
passed against the encroacher or any of his agent from entering upon
the said land. All the tenants (who were, incidentally, government
servants) were taken as tenants of the Block Panchayat (to whom the
land and houses were transferred for control and management).
The Salient Learning Points in Examples Above
General Rule – Start the removal of encroachment from government land (start
with public road or a government land around a public road) within two months of
your joining your post. It WORKS BETTER .
(i) Divide and Rule
• It is ill-advised to take up removal of encroachment of the whole
town or city or a large part thereof in a single initial drive. The
encroachers will create so much law & order that even the state
government would be shaken and, in all probability, you would be
forced to abandon the eviction.

53 | P a g e
• Initially, identify a rich and/or powerful person who has blatantly
encroached government land and remove the encroachment
ruthlessly. Nobody will create law & order for such a person (there
may be some odd calls – ignore them). In fact, many will rally
behind you from hereon.
• In second step identify a small patch or a small street and remove
all the road/area encroachments (due to your first action, this would
be a smooth affair) in fair, transparent and ruthless fashion. You will
do well to stay or at least start the demolition under your
supervision.
• Thereafter, take another street or another small area and complete
the eviction in impartial, strict fashion. It is better that you be
physically present during the demolition (at least at the start of it)
and ensure fair and strict implementation ' ! +
! # # & " " # ! &
" # (* There is not likely to be any law & order as the
people whose eviction has already taken place become a pressure
group and spoiler of any unified opposition which these new batch
of encroachers may try to forge. The persons who have already got
evicted would start arguing that nobody came forward when their
houses/shops were getting demolished. Moreover, they tend to
become champions of encroachment removal now, and may even
actively support you.
• By this time enough momentum would have got created in the
encroachment removal drive. Just systematically plan, lead and
manage the removal of encroachments in one street or group of
areas after another – until your job is done.
(ii) Carrot & Stick
• The encroachments of petty shops or other type of shops can be
removed by you but they tend to come back in a year or so (if not

54 | P a g e
earlier) as people who survived by running of those shops are still
going to run same business somehow or the other.
• It is better for sustainable removal to give some type of
rehabilitation package to those who cooperate as per details given
in example above.
• However, DO NOT offer rehabilitation to begin with. The
rehabilitation should be offered at second or third stage of eviction
and NEVER on the public roads.
• It should be after the requests by the encroachers and not as an
offer from your side or else you will be seen to be weak and your
eviction drive will suffer.
• It should be clear to one and all that rehabilitation is not a right but
is being extended as per request of the persons as a special
favour.
• Hence, you have this carrot of rehabilitation which substantially
reduce law & order potential. The fair, impartial, ruthless eviction
does rest of the job.
(iii)Time is the Essence
In eviction to be successful and violence free the time is of real
essence. You have to be thorough in your preparation and then swift
and quick in your execution. Once on the field, you must firstly begin
the execution without delays and then go on to finish it uninterrupted in
the quickest time possible. Hence, hire two extra JCBs (excavators)
and ten more labourers but finish the job quickly and efficiently.
(iv) Be Firm and Knowledgable
In the field be absolutely firm once you have started the demolition.
Any sign of confusion creates potential law & order. Also thorough
knowledge of law is very useful. For example, an IAS Sub-divisional
Magistrate when he was about to get demolition of a house done was

55 | P a g e
confronted by one lady of the house who doused herself with kerosene
and threatened to set herself on fire. She was immediately arrested on
the spot and sent to police station (with threat of criminal case for
attempt to suicide) and made to sit in the police station until the
demolition was completed.
(v) Planning & Ability to think on-the-spot
Planning is a basic necessity and the single most important element in
successful evictions. Plan strategy, identify suitable men, mobilize
suitable material. Always go on a demolition with a JCB (excavator)
even when labourers are going to be the main tool.
The ability to think on the spot is always going to be useful, even to an
extent indispensible. Hence, identify officers and staff with this ability.
In other words identify men who possess courage – at least to carry
out your orders. You yourself should also try to develop this trait. This
trait comes from ability to think clearly in pressure situations and
courage that you possess.
(vi) Stubbornness
This appears to be a negative trait but now-a-days law enforcement is
such a rare occurrence that you would be made to feel as though you
are the most stubborn and unreasonable fellow. Well, almost the
enemy of the people. It is not so. Remember it.
Some people will make you feel otherwise – feel it and ignore those
feelings.
,
" - "

56 | P a g e
(i) 144 or 107?
Under the Code of Criminal Procedure section 107 deals with taking
bond to keep good behavior from persons who are likely to commit
breach of peace while section 144CrPC deals with prohibitory orders
(prohibiting conduct of certain activities or actions or events etc which
are allowed to be done in ORDINARY course of things) passed
basically to ensure maintenance of peace and tranquility in an area.
Now, the issue is, in which context and situation which one of these
two provisions is to be made use of. This issue cropped up in context
of orders passed under section 144CrPC prohibiting running of a
controversial hostel as it was leading to breach of peace in the area
and the affected party claimed that any likely breach of peace ought to
be dealt with under section 107CrPC by taking bond from such
persons who were likely to cause breach of peace that they would not
do so. They claimed that prohibiting the whole activity was uncalled for
and unnecessary.
Kandhamal district and more so its Baliguda Subdivision is
communally as well as ethnically very sensitive. In fact, it has hit the
National headlines for the communal and ethnic disturbances many a
times over the last few years.
It was similar communal and ethnic disturbances debilitating the district
when this story occurred. The communal disturbances and rioting had
shaken the peace and social fabric of the district over the past few
months. In such a situation any and every issue tended to acquire
communal overtones. One such issue was running of a hostel
ostensibly for educational purposes. This hostel had become flashpoint
of communal disturbances in the area as it was run ostensibly for
educational purposes but was being vehemently opposed alleging that
it was being used as tool to indoctrinate the locals. The District
Administration had finally dealt with this specific issue in rather
technical fashion and a decision was taken in “All Stakeholders

57 | P a g e
Meeting” or “Shanti Sabha” that the hostel would be run only after
obtaining requisite permission from the Government in Women &
Child Development Department which had issued a detailed
“Circular” to regulate the running of such hostels.
However, after a week or so of the decision to stop running of the
controversial hostel it was informed to the Sub-divisional Magistrate
that the said “hostel” had again been opened and housed about 7 to 10
children aging between 6 to 11 years. It was a potentially explosive
situation as the said hostel could be attacked in the night in which case
a grave communal disturbances could have erupted in the district.
Moreover, this was contrary to the decisions taken in the “Shanti
Sabha” as the requisite permissions of the Women & Child
Development Department had not yet been obtained. In the event,
the young SDM suo moto passed an order under section 144 of Code
of Criminal Procedure ordering an immediate closure of the said hostel
and shifting of the children to their respective families and guardians.
As easy as the promulgation of the prohibitory orders under section
144 of Code of Criminal Procedure might seem, the actual
implementation through the police was fraught with practical risks and
ticklish points. When the hostel was approached there was not a single
adult present there who could be identified as the Supervisor or
Warden of the Hostel and repeated attempts to get such a person drew
a blank. The children had been well tutored to tell that they were there
managing the place on their own and nobody else was there to take
care of them. They refused to tell family addresses as well.
It was obvious that once the children were taken to the police station,
the groups behind this would go to PRESS claiming that police had
arrested young children. In such a scenario it was apprehended that
the children would testify saying that even when they gave addresses
of their guardians and supervisor, the police did not listen to them or
attempted to contact the guardians. This would have discredited the

58 | P a g e
District Administration whereas allowing the hostel to run would have
resulted in a potential ticking time-bomb left unattended.
Solution
The solution was found by the SDM himself going to the spot, got the
address of parent of one of the child there and then that father of one
of the children was physically brought to the controversial hostel and
then all children were picked by the SDM along with this father. Each
child was thereupon dropped (along with the father of one of the
children) to their individual homes and hand-written receipts of having
got the delivery of their children was obtained from the respective
parents. This exercise went on from 9AM to 5AM (next day morning).
Thereafter, the orders under section 144CrPC were repeatedly
promulgated and the problem never cropped up in the field.
Issue
The party running the controversial hostel approached Hon’ble High
Court of Orissa and prayed the following
(a) The running of the controversial hostel was a “good” activity and in
case any breach of peace was apprehended then the persons who
would create such a breach of peace could have been dealt with
under section 107CrPC to keep peace rather than prohibiting the
activity of running of the hostel itself.
(b) Hence, action under section 107CrPC should have been taken
instead of action under section 144CrPC.
The Hon’ble High Court ordered that the SDM should consider the
prayer and pass a reasoned order as to why action was taken under
section 144CrPC and not under section 107CrPC.
The young SDM passed his reasoned order as per the orders of the
Hon’ble High Court basically stating the following

59 | P a g e
1. The action under section 107CrPC ordering bond for good behavior
is aimed and directed against specified persons directing them
NOT TO DO ANYTHING which may prejudicially affect the peace
of an area. In other words the persons who are identified as likely
mischief monger are forbidden to do ANYTHING that may create
situation of breach of peace.
2. Whereas the prohibitory orders under section 144CrPC are
basically directed against ALL PERSONs (who may not be even
individually identifiable) and an ACTIVITY or group of ACTIVITIES
are specifically prohibited.
3. Hence, when A SPECIFIED ACTIVITY has to be prohibited from it
being performed by ANYONE for prevention of breach of peace or
tranquility then the action has to be taken under section 144CrPC
4. Whereas when a SPECIFIED PERSON(s) has to be prohibited
from performing ANY ACTIVITY that may prejudicially affect peace
of an area then the action has to be taken under section 107CrPC.
5. In nut shell when focus is PROHIBITION of SPECIFIED ACTIVITY
by EVERYONE then 144CrPC whereas when the focus is
prohibition of ALL ACTIVITIES (prejudicial to peace) of SPECIFIED
PERSONs then 107CrPC.
6. Since, in the case at hand the activity of RUNNING of HOSTEL by
EVERYONE or ANYONE had to be prohibited, hence, action could
be taken only under section 144CrPC and not under section
107CrPC. Moreover, all the persons had to be prohibited from
running of the hostel and they could not be specifically identified.
Hence, the only recourse open was to prohibit the running of the
hostel by anyone under section 144CrPC. This just cannot be
achieved under section 107CrPC at all.
(ii) Illegal Raid

60 | P a g e
Thuamul Rampur Block (taluk) in Kalahandi district of Orissa is
indisputably the most backward and inaccessible block. The young IAS
Officer posted there as part of his training used to best describe the
situation stating that Kalahandi district is to Orissa what Orissa is to
India and, in turn, Thuamul Rampur is to Kalahandi what Kalahandi is
to Orissa. In short in case the Government wished to “punish”
someone he was posted to Kalahandi and in Kalahandi, Thuamul
Rampur was the place to send people on punishment postings.
Thuamul Rampur is in nestled in the lush and picturesque Eastern
Ghats with potential for thousands of square kilometres of Coffee
plantation and an Ooty style hillstation but what actually exists are
many ravaged naked hills due to “Jhoom” cultivation (shifting
cultivation) and endemic cerebral malaria. The local legend (in
Bhawanipatna – the district HQ of Kalahandi) is that if you so much as
sip water in Thuamul Rampur you will catch cerebral malaria. The fact
that new IAS Sub-Collector caught cerebral malaria thrice in as many
flying visits to Thuamul Rampur did not help the reputation much.
The young IAS officer sought and landed in Thuamul Rampur Block as
Block Development Officer as part of his IAS probation District Training
(after his request to work in Ersama Block in the aftermath of Orissa’s
Super-Cyclone was turned down by the State Government – which is
another story). He not only got himself posted there, he also shifted
lock stock and barrel for the whole period of three months of his
training as BDO. The PWD Inspection Bungalow he moved into was
more than a century old and perfectly fitted the picture of haunted
dilapidated bungalow of horror movies of Ramsay genre that he had
watched so fondly as a student. Only the ghosts here were not of the
same variety but of the modern avatar – typically bad trio of politicians,
contractors, bureaucrats.
Rai Das was the local member of Zilla Panchayat and ruled the area
with his henchmen. One such man was Debashish. He was 110

61 | P a g e
number criminal and habitual offender (das nambari). He ran a shuttle
single bus service between Thuamul Rampur and Bhawanipatna on
the only road that connected Thuamul Rampur to the rest of the world.
This bus used to be always packed with people worse than sheep or
goat. The young Officer upon joining saw the precarious spectacle of a
ramshackle of a vehicle overloaded with people on possible parts and
chugging along the circuitous and tortuous Ghat roads. Debashish was
warned repeatedly as it was recipe for a disaster waiting to happen,
however, all the warnings fell on deaf ears.
Within twenty odd days of his joining at the Block the inevitable
happened and the overloaded bus fell into a small nalla killing two
men. Debashish was told to compensate the nearest kin of the victim
immediately in view of their extreme poverty. However, given the
general affairs of things wherein the henchmen like Debashish felt that
they were beyond law and bothered only about their own benefits, no
heed was paid on the need to financially compensate the victim’s
nearest kin. There was, expectedly, no insurance cover for the vehicle
and nothing was forthcoming.
In fact, after a point all the attempts by the young Officer to meet or talk
to Debashish proved futile and he virtually became untraced while the
wives of the killed victims kept on coming to the Block Office to press
for their compensation payments. The follow-up messages sent
through staff of the Block Office returned empty promises which were
never fulfilled.
As the house of Debashish had also been contacted, hence, the young
officer got to know the location of Debashish’s house. In any case the
house was well known to block staff as well as the Block Jeep driver.
Therefore, at the end, one fine early morning at about 5:30AM the
officer called his driver (as usually he would do for numerous other
field visits) and landed at Debashish’s house hoping to catch him in his
sleep. But, upon ENTRY & SEARCH the house found empty. In order

62 | P a g e
to force Debashish to come to the Block Office, the officer picked the
colour television of Debashish’s and brought it to the Block Office and
kept it in his chamber.
The result was not what the officer had expected. Debashish first
attempted to file an FIR against the IAS officer for robbery, when that
proved difficult; he filed Complaint Case under section 200 directly with
the Sub divisional Judicial Magistrate.
It should, however, be noted that even after committing technical
robbery nothing actually happened to the young IAS officer as the
justice was on his side. However, the legal mess the actions created
meant that the mischievous Debashish was able to escape paying
anything to the victim’s family.
A more effective approach (while at probation stage) would be to use
good offices of Collector and also the police and get such things done.

63 | P a g e
.
Code of Criminal Procedure and Important Statutes
! !
! " # $
Introduction
An IAS Officer in the field deals with innumerable laws, statutes, rules, circulars,
guidelines and it is virtually impossible to enlist all of them without losing focus on
the really important ones. This chapter will cover and focus on the statues, laws
which form the core of working of an IAS Officer as a Magistrate in the field.
The main statute in this regard is the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC in short)
which covers close to 90% of criminal justice system that an IAS officer deals
with. The following pages contain a table that covers almost all the important
sections and provisions of the CrPC that an IAS officer needs to know. In fact,
without fear of contradiction, it can be said that assimilation and imbibing of these
important sections and commentary thereon will enable an IAS officer to deal
with CrPC for whole of his career. In a tabular form statute wise and provision
wise commentary is made which can be used as ready reference while reading
preceding chapters as well as while encountering issues in the field.
The Indian Penal Code and Indian Evidence Act are dealt with thereafter in a
brief fashion. The appreciation of IPC and Indian Evidence Act is useful in being
able to use these statutes along with CrPC. These two laws are covered only
briefly and effort is to create interest in the reader about these statutes so that he
reads them regularly as per need.

64 | P a g e
1. Code of Criminal Procedure 1973
Section Heading Provision Commentary
2 Definitions The important
technical terms
used in the
CrPC are
defined under
this section
This section has immense
importance because when a word is
used in CrPC its meaning is strictly
as defined under section 2 (in case
it is not defined under section 2 then
you may look up “General Clauses
Act”etc). Note that you shall not
assume simple dictionary meanings
of technical words used in the
sections as it leads to wrong
conclusions. It can be illustrated
using one simple example – in
common usage the word
“complaint” is taken to mean same
as FIR – like commonly people say,
“I have filed a complaint to police”.
However, CrPC legally defines a
“complaint” as an allegation given to
a Magistrate and never uses the
word to mean an allegation given to
police. Any allegation given to
police under CrPC is called FIR (for
cognizable offences). This may
sound fussy but it has a direct
bearing on interpretation of various
provisions of CrPC – see
commentary on section 195CrPC
for details on this example.

Law in practice

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (6)

Similar to Law in practice

Similar to Law in practice (20)

More from bansi default

More from bansi default (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Law in practice