ZORAVAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has prayed for quashing of order dated 25.2.2005 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Khamanon in proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C and further the order dated 23.8.2005 (Annexure P-5) passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib whereby the revision filed by him was dismissed.

(2.) THE only short issue raised by learned counsel for the petitioner is that the civil suit regarding the property in dispute was already pending before the Civil Courts and during the pendency thereof, the present proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C were initiated which according to him, in terms of settled position of law, could not be initiated. Referring to the material on record, he submitted that on 17.5.2001, Jit Singh son of Deva Singh and Chanan Singh son of Asha Singh filed suit for permanent injunction restraining the petitioner and respondent No. 7 from dispossessing them from the suit land which included the small portion of land bearing Khewat No. 13, Khatoni No. 35, Khasra No. 43//3/1 (2-10). The proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C were initiated only with regard to this small portion of land. In the civil suit filed by Jit Singh and another, the learned trial Court vide order dated 6.9.2002 in application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC restrained the defendants in the suit from dispossessing the plaintiffs therein from the suit land. However, in appeal by the petitioner and respondent No. 7 against the order passed by the trial Court in application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC, the parties were directed to maintain status quo with regard to possession of Khasra No. 43//3/1 (2-10). It is stated that the civil suit is still pending. Further he submitted that in the suit filed by Jit Singh son of Deva Singh and Chanan Singh son of Asha Singh, the claim was that they were co-sharers and in the possession of the suit land. However, on a Kalendra dated 14.3.2003 submitted by the police, proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C were initiated on account of dispute of possession of land between the present petitioner and respondent No.7 on one part and Jit Singh and Chanan Singh on the other part. During the proceedings before SDM, the petitioner raised preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the proceedings in view of pendency of the civil suit. However, still the learned SDM vide order dated 25.2.2005 directed that the respondents having been found in possession of the suit land, the possession thereof should be delivered to them. The petitioner preferred revision against this order. However, before learned Additional Sessions Judge also, the petitioner failed preliminary on the ground that the parties to the civil dispute were different than the parties to the proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C.

(3.) CONTROVERTING the allegations made by the petitioner, learned counsel for the respondents No. 2 to 4 submitted that the Courts below have rightly entertained and adjudicated upon in the proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C for the reasons that the parties were different. Once there was apprehension of breach of peace, for appointment of receiver and proceeding under Section 145 of the Code, the SDM had the jurisdiction to entertain the dispute. Further, she submitted that the petitioner having already failed in the revision before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, the present petition in the form of quashing under Section 482 Cr.P.C is not maintainable as the same is nothing else but a second revision. She relied upon a judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Dharampal and others v. Smt. Ramshri and others, 1993(1) RCR(Criminal) 696.