Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners has also relied upon a
Judgment of this Court, reported in 2007 (1) PLJR 692 (Rabindra
Nath Singh Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.) .It has been submitted that
a title dispute cannot be the subject matter of a proceeding under
Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Learned counsel for
the petitioners has further submitted that despite the fact that the
petitioners had preferred a revision against the order of the learned
Sub Divisional Magistrate, the learned Sessions Judge only on
technicality i.e. since the order was an interlocutory order, has rejected
the revision petition.
Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners has also relied upon a
Judgment of this Court, reported in 2007 (1) PLJR 692 (Rabindra
Nath Singh Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.) .It has been submitted that
a title dispute cannot be the subject matter of a proceeding under
Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Learned counsel for
the petitioners has further submitted that despite the fact that the
petitioners had preferred a revision against the order of the learned
Sub Divisional Magistrate, the learned Sessions Judge only on
technicality i.e. since the order was an interlocutory order, has rejected
the revision petition.
This Court applying the ratio of Dr. Rabindra
Nath Singh (supra) is constrained to hold that there is
complete lack of materials showing application of mind by
the authorities to the show-cause reply and/or explanation
filed by the petitioner and as such the impugned cryptic
order of punishment dated 12.11.2003 can not be sustained
4
and is accordingly quashed with a direction to the
Principal Secretary of the Health Department to reconsider
the matter afresh to pass a fresh reasoned order after
perusing the two show cause replies filed by the petitioner
dated 11.7.2003 and 1.9.2003 as contained in Annexure 10
and 12 to this writ application.