Hi ,  welcome  |  Textile views  |  Political views  |   CA and CS News  |   Legal News  |   Government jobs  |  Textile jobs 

Seeking Police aid under Section 151 of The C.P.C

Written By Views maker on Saturday, April 26, 2014 | 5:34 AM

Orders interlocutory in nature are not like final decree passed in suit – enforcement and implementation of such orders under section 151 is permissible without resorting to execution proceedings 1

By ordering police help the Court below had merely taken the follow up steps to implement its earlier order of injunction. The objection that a direction of that nature cannot be issued to the police authorities, who are not parties to the proceedings, raised by the petitioners has no substance. When the Court finds that a litigant, who had obtained an order from it, is not in a position to have its full benefit owing to either the obstruction or non-cooperation of the other party to the proceedings, it is always open to the Court to resort to the law enforcement machinery to see that its order is obeyed and I do not see anything illegal or irregular about it2 .The inherent powers of this court under Section 151 C.P.C. are wide and are not subject to any limitation. Where in violation of a stay order or injunction against a party, something has been done in disobedience, it will be the duty of the court as a policy to set the wrong right and not allow the perpetuation of the wrong doing. 7 In our view, the inherent power will not only be available in such a case, but it is bound to be exercised in that manner in the interests of justice. Even apart from Section 151, we should, observe that, as a matter of judicial policy, the court should guard against itself being satisfied in circumstances like this by holding that it is powerless to undo a wrong done in disobedience of the court's orders.

Nothing in this code (C.P.C) shall be deemed to limit or otherwise affect the inherent power of the court to make such orders as may be necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of court. The section itself says that nothing in the code shall be deemed to limit or otherwise affect the inherent power of the court to make orders necessary for the ends of justice. In the face of such a clear statement, it is not possible to hold that the provisions of the code control the inherent power by limiting it or otherwise affecting it. The inherent power has not been conferred upon the court. No technicality can prevent the court from doing justice in exercise of its inherent power. By ordering the police help to respondent, the court below had merely taken the follow-up steps to implement its earlier order of injunction. When the court finds that a litigant, who had secured an order from court is not in a position to have full benefit owing either to obstruction or non-co-operation of the other side, it is always open to resort to the law enforcement machinery to see that its order is obeyed and there is nothing illegal or irregular in that 3. Court in exercise of the powers under Section 151, is competent to pass any orders so that its orders are duly complied with and obeyed. In this case, the petitioner apprehended that there will be interference by the respondents with reference to the petitioner's enjoyment of the properties notwithstanding the order of injunction made by this Court. According to the petitioner, such interference will prevent the petitioner from enjoying the properties. In that event, the order passed by this Court will be of no assistance to the petitioner. In other words, what the petitioner apprehends is, a breach of peace if he were to enjoy the properties in respect of which an injunction has been granted. In the above circumstances, it is no answer to say that the petitioner shall wait till the order is disobeyed and then resort to the remedy prescribed under Order 39, Rule 2-A, Civil Procedure Code. What he really wants by means of this application is that there should not be any breach of peace because, in his view, the respondents would high-handedly interfere with his enjoyment of the properties notwithstanding the order of injunction. 4

The necessity of police aid is to be decided by the party and is not to be decided by the Court. In such circumstances, the District Munsif, ought not to have passed such an order. Further, police aid cannot be granted simultaneously with an order of injunction. Only if the Court is satisfied that the order of injunction passed by it is not obeyed by the other party, and the party who has secured the order is not in a position to enjoy the benefits of the order because of the conduct of the other party and police interference is absolutely necessary, the Court can grant an order of police aid. In this case, the District Munsif has thrown to winds all principles of law and justice and passed an order of police aid as if it should automatically follow and attach itself to an order of injunction whenever the civil Court passed an order of injunction. The order granting police aid is wholly unsustainable and requires to be set aside. 5

The lower Courts are frequently confronted with the question of issuing police protection. Since the issuance of police aid is often raised in one way or other, by the lower Courts it is appropriate to issue the following guide lines:

· In appropriate cases, Civil Court has the power to issue suitable directions to police officials as servants of law to extend their aid and assistance in the execution of decrees and orders of Civil Courts or in implementing an order of injunction passed by it. (1992 TLNJ 120).

· Ordering police protection has got serious consequences, impinging on the rights of the parties.

· Police aid is not to be granted simultaneously with an order of injunction.

· In cases where the lower Courts order police protection/police aid in the execution of decrees and orders of the civil Courts or in implementing an order of injunction passed by it, the Court is to record reasons as to how and why the case is the appropriate case to order police aid and for what purpose the police aid is ordered.

· Police protection/police aid may not be ordered by a non-speaking order. Order of Court for police aid might give room for the parties to take law into their own hands. The party having the order of Court for police aid, might try to disturb the status quo - either by trying to take possession or trying to dispossess the opponent.

· Order of the Court for police protection is to specifically indicate in precise terms the purpose for which police protection is ordered. 6

1. (J.Rajagopalan -vs- Uma Maheswari 2014 (1) CTC 365 )

2. Kudiyan and 5 others Vs. B.Ranganathan ,1991 (1) LW 604

3. K.G.Gopal and ors. V. Lillybai (1991) L.W. 559

4. (1993) 1 MLJ 274

5. 1996 (1)LW 52

6. AIR 2006 Mad 186, 2006 (2) CTC 21

7. Century flour mills ltd vs S.Suppiah and another 1975 (2) MLJ 54

0 comments:

Post a Comment