Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

1. This application under Sub-sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'the Code') is directed against the order dated 26-7-1997 passed in Cr. Revision No. 1/97/19/97 by Shri Binod Mohan Prasad, 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Jehanabad through which the order passed by Shri S. Shah, Executive Magistrate acting as Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jehanabad in Case No. 193 (M)/97, dated 25-2-1997 was set aside.

2. On the strength of a report dated 13-2-1997 submitted by the Anchal Adhikari, Jehanabad a proceeding under Section 144 of the Code was started on 15-2-1997 by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Jehanabad against both the parties with respect to 37 decimals of land bearing Plot No. 346, Khata No. 94 of Village Umta Police Station and District Jehanabad. In the said report the Anchal Adhikari had stated that 8 bags of cement of petitioner No. 2, Uday Shanker, was lying in the room at the disputed land. When the Anchal Adhikari returned from the site the lock of the aforesaid room was broken and the cement was removed by opposite party No. 1, Md. Allauddin. The Anchal Adhikari brought this fact to the notice of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate vide his Memo No. 146 dated 15-2-1997. Both the parties appeared before the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate who converted this proceeding into one under Section 145 of the Code and attached the disputed land under Section 146(1) of the Code. Opposite Party filed Criminal Revision No. 1/97/19/97 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jehanabad before whom it was submitted that Title Suit No. 118 of 1996 for the part of the disputed land between opposite party and third persons was pending. The present petitioners appeared before the Court and in their reply they stated that the petitioners were not the parties to the aforesaid title suit and mere pendency of a title suit is no bar to the proceeding under Sections 145 and 146(1) of the Code. However, the learned Additional Sessions Judge allowed the said criminal revision by the order dated 26-7-1997 by which he quashed the order dated 25-2-1997 passed by the learned Executive Magistrate initiating the proceeding under Section 145 of the Code as also the order passed under Section 146(1) of the Code. It is against this order that the present revision application has been filed.

5. In the meantime by an order dated 12-12-1997 a proceeding under Section 144 of the Code was started in which this opposite party (the plaintiff of T.S. No. 118/98) was made first party. In his report the Anchal Adhikari had mentioned that through a registered sale deed dated 14-10-1996 petitioner No. 2 has purchased 7 1/4 decimals of land out the total 37 decimals of land from the heirs of late Mustafa and for the rest of the land there was an agreement for sale with petitioner No. 3. These two persons along with their vendors had claimed that this opposite party was only their tenant and since he was not paying rent he is liable to be evicted. From this it would appear that the sale deed was only with respect to 7 1/4 decimal of land and was after the filing of the suit and the passing of the order of status quo in Title Suit No. 118/96. However, the learned Executive Magistrate by his order dated 15-2-1997 initiated a proceeding under Section 144 of the Code. When this opposite party received a notice of the said proceeding, he submitted that his claim was confined only to 12 decimals of land for which the civil suit was pending in the Court of Sub-Judge, Jehanabad where the order of status quo has already been passed and, therefore, he prayed to drop the proceeding. The learned Executive Magistrate has, however, ignoring this petition converted the proceeding into one under Section 145 of the Code even when a civil suit for declaration of title and possession with respect to the part of the disputed land was already pending before a civil Court. Against the aforesaid illegal order passed under Sections 145 and 146(1) of the Code this opposite party preferred Criminal Revision No. 1/97/19/97 which was heard and decided by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Jehanabad through his impugned order dated 26-7-1997. Before the learned revisional Court the present petitioners who are opposite party took up a peculiar point that since in both the proceedings the defendants and the second parties were not the same, the pendency of this civil suit would not bar continuance of the proceeding under Section 145 of the Code. This point was, however, dealt with in the impugned judgment by the learned Court below in its paragraph No. 6 and for the grounds stated therein the learned Court below quashed the order dated 25-2-1997 passed by the learned Magistrate initiating the proceeding under Section 145 of the Code as also the order attaching the disputed land under Section 145 of the Code.