- (1.) The conspectus of the facts, culminating in the commencement, relevant for the limited purpose of deciding the sole controversy, involved in the instant petition and emanating from the record, is that Prabhu Dyal son of Kalu Ram, was the owner of agricultural land in question, which was included in the limits of municipality (for brevity "the MC") of Thanesar, District Kurukshetra, in exercise of powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 4 of The Haryana Municipal Act, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as "the MC Act"), by means of notifications dated 24.11.1983 (Annexure P3) & 23.10.1984 (Annexure P4). In pursuance of letter dated 29.2.1985 (Annexure P5), the Gram Panchayat had already handed over all the records to the Executive Officer of the MC. Petitioner Gurdip Singh had purchased the agricultural land in litigation from Prabhu Dyal, by virtue of registered sale deed dated 4.7.1995. The mutation, bearing No.367 (Annexure P2) was duly sanctioned in his favour in this respect.
(2.) Although the land in litigation already stood vested in the MC, but still, the District Town Planner (respondent No.2) made a complaint to the police on 14.7.1998, which, in substance, is as under:- "According to local enquiry, the said construction/excavation is being made by Sh.Darshan Singh s/o Sh.Santa Singh R/o Vill.Gangheri, teh. Pehowa, Distt.Kurukshetra. 2. That by making un-authorized construction, reconstruction/excavation, the accused has violated section 6 of Punjab Schedule Act No.41 of 1963. 3. The accused has violated section 7 of Punjab Act No.41, 1963 by using the present land for commercial purpose. 4. The land in dispute falls in Kurukshetra Part A which has been declared controlled area U/s 4 (1)(A) of the Punjab Act, which has been notified vide Haryana Govt. Gazette No.530 VDP 69/483 22.1.69. In this the construction/re-construction/excavation without sanction of the Director Town Planning is prohibited. Therefore requested that by ensuring the name of original owner of construction/re-construction/excavation appropriate action be taken against the accused and an arrangement be made to get the construction/excavation stopped forthwith and after registration of the FIR, this office should be informed with regard to the no. and date of the FIR. From the averments of the above said letter, an offence u/s 6, 7 of the Pb. Act is found to be made out. The case has been registered on the above said letter."
(3.) That being the position, a criminal case was stated to have been registered against the petitioner, by means of FIR, bearing No.535 dated 13.8.1998 (Annexure P1), on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under sections 6 and 7 of The Punjab Scheduled Roads and Controlled Areas Restriction of Unregulated Development Act, 1963 (hereinafter to be referred as "the Controlled Areas Act"), in the manner described hereinabove.;