HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) THE respondent, Khindu, filed a petition under Section 145, Criminal P. C. , against the present petitioners in the Court of the Magistrate first class, Theog, alleging that he and his uncles had been in possession of the disputed land and were forcibly dispossessed by the present petitioners between April and June 1952 (the petition, was filed on 23-6-1952 ). Khindu asked for action under Section 145, Criminal P. C. The Magistrate, after making an inquiry, came to the conclusion that Khindu was in possession in Jeth 2009 B. and had been forcibly dispossessed by the present petitioners. Accordingly, he directed that Khindube put back in possession of the land. He further directed that the petitioners should hand over 30 maunds of maize to Khindu, or in lieu thereof, Rs. 400/- in cash. Against this order, the petitioners went up in revision to the learned Sessions Judge of Mahasu, but their revision petition was rejected. Hence, this revision petition to this Court.
(2.) AFTER hearing learned counsel for the petitioners, I admitted this petition on the 10th of June last on the following two points: (a) The order of the Magistrate was bad because there was no preliminary order as required by Section 145, Criminal P. C. (b) The Magistrate's order directing the petitioners to hand over 30 maunds of maize, or, in the alternative, Rs. 400/- in cash to the respondent, Khindu, was not covered by any provision of law.
(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.