The Allahabad High Court has reaffirmed that cases of illegal encroachment on gram sabha land cannot be pursued under the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 (PDPP Act). Instead, such disputes must be adjudicated under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, which governs eviction proceedings.
Justice Saurabh Srivastava passed the ruling while quashing proceedings initiated against Brahmdutt Yadav under Section 3/5 of the PDPP Act. The court referred to the precedent set in Munshi Lal and another vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another, where it was held that criminal proceedings for alleged illegal encroachment or trespass over gram sabha land must await the determination of rights by the revenue court.
In the case before the court, an FIR was lodged by the Lekhpal against Yadav, alleging that he and other nearby farmers had encroached on public property owned by the gram sabha, causing damage. Following the registration of the FIR, a charge sheet was filed, and summons were issued by the magistrate.
Challenging the summons, Yadav’s counsel contended that the magistrate had not applied his mind and that any dispute over encroachment falls squarely within the jurisdiction of the revenue court under the 2006 Code.
Justice Srivastava, agreeing with the applicant, noted that the PDPP Act was specifically enacted to address acts of vandalism and destruction of public property during riots and public disturbances. Applying it to a case of alleged land encroachment, where ownership and rights were yet to be adjudicated, amounted to an abuse of legal process.
In its decision dated April 15, which was recently uploaded, the court held that the continuation of proceedings under the PDPP Act in this matter was not legally sustainable and thus quashed the criminal case against Yadav.
