Nagendra Singh Munda And Ors vs State Of Jharkhand on 2 February, 2015

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Jharkhand High Court

Nagendra Singh Munda And Ors vs State Of Jharkhand on 2 February, 2015

Bench: Amitav K. Gupta

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                          Cr. Revision No. 430 of 2013
                                      -----
             1. Nagendra Singh Munda
             2. Surya Singh Munda
             3. Chutu Singh
             4. Rakho Singh Munda
             5. Bidyadhar Singh Munda
             6. Ramlal Singh Munda
             7. Jiten Singh Munda
             8. Karam Singh Munda
             All resident of village & P.O. Chora, P.S. Tiruldih, Distt-Seraikella-
             Khanswan.                                       .... ....Petitioners.
                                         Versus
             1. State of Jharkhand
             2. Shankar Singh Munda,S/O Ganesh Singh Munda
             3. Ranjeet Singh Munda,
             4. Sanjeet Singh Munda, Both S/O Shankar Singh Munda
             All resident of village & P.O. Chora, P.S. Tiruldih, Distt-
             Seraikella-Khanswan.                             ....    Opp.Parties.

     CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAV K. GUPTA
                                    ----
     For the Petitioners     : Mr.Jagannath Mahato, Advocate.
     For the State           : APP.
     For the O.Ps.           : Mr.Prabhash Sinha, Advocate.
                                         ----
08/02.02.2015

This revision is directed against 19.01.2013 passed in Misc. Case no.179/2012 by learned S.D.M., Chandil whereby order under Section 144 Cr.P.C. has been made absolute against petitioners/2 nd party and vacated in favour of O.P./1st party Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the trial court has illegally made the order absolute against the petitioners and the same is not sustainable in law as it has been passed against the provisions of Section 144 IPC. In support of his contention he has relied on the decisions reported in the case of Dawan Singh & Ors. Vs. Deo Narain Singh & Ors., reported in AIR(38) 1951 Patna 253 and also in the case of Gopalji Prasad vs. State of Sikkim, reported in 1981 Cri.L.J. 60.

Heard. Perused the impugned order and the decisions relied on by the learned counsel for the petitioners.

It is evident that the impugned order has lost its force in terms of Section 144(4) IPC, however, it is well settled that any finding regarding right, title and interest in a proceeding under Section 144 Cr.P.C. is beyond the purview of law and it has no bearing in a suit for adjudication of the right, title, interest or possession in the competent court of jurisdiction i.e. civil court. Accordingly, any finding on the right, title and interest of the parties in the suit property is not tenable.

With the said observations the revision stands disposed of.

(Amitav K. Gupta, J.) Biswas.

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Jharkhand High Court