If the property was before the coming into force of S.52A Wakf Act, no prosecution will be initiated for possession of wakf property without the sanction of the Wakf Board: Kerala HC

Justice PVKunhikrishnan Thus, it overturned the case initiated against post office employees after it was determined that they had been in possession of the property since 1999.

“A perusal of the same does not show that even before the insertion of Section 52A of the Act, a person occupying trust property was liable to prosecution. Undoubtedly, even before the insertion of Section 52A of the Act, ownership of this property was vested in the Ministry of Posts.”

The petitioners, namely the post office employees, were charged with committing a criminal offense under Section 52 A of the Wakf Act for illegally taking possession of Wakf property without prior permission from the Wakf Board. The complaint was presented to the Magistrate’s Court and a summons was also issued.

The petitioners have argued that even before the insertion of Section 52A in 2013, the post office was in possession of the suit property.

The court observed that the post office had been using the property in question based on a lease since 1999. The court noted that a notice was sent to the post office informing them that the lease had been terminated and they were instructed to hand over vacant possession of the property. property. The Court then noted that the Wakf Tribunal had directed the postal department to vacate the property within 45 days.

The Court observed that a complaint was lodged in the Magistrate Court alleging that an offense punishable under Section 52A of the Act had been committed. The court also observed that Section 52A was added only in 2013.

While examining Section 52A, the court noted that the legislative intent behind Section 52A was to initiate prosecution for illegal alienation, acquisition and disposal of property without prior permission of the Wakf Board after the provision was inserted by amendment in 2013.

The court observed that the property belonged to the post office since 1999 and hence they could not be sued under Section 52A of the Trust Act.

Therefore, the petition was allowed and the cases against the petitioners were quashed.

Counsel for Petitioners: Advocate Suvin R Menon

Counsel for the Participants: Standing Counsel TP Sajid and Jamsheed Hafiz, Senior Public Prosecutor Renjith TR

Case Number: CRL.MC NO. 2018 5601

Case Title: K Sukumaran v. Kerala State Waqf Board

Quote: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 711