Bhupendra Kumar Rathi, J. - (1.) THIS is a petition under Article 226 Constitution of India to quash the order dated 18.11.98, Annexure 11 to the Writ Petition, passed by IV Additional Sessions Judge, Etawah. I have heard Sri A.K. Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri G.P. Dikshit, learned counsel for opp. parties and the A.G.A.
(2.) THE facts giving rise to the petition are as follows: The petitioner moved an application for taking action under Section 145 Cr.P.C. before the S.D.M., Bidhuna, District Etawah. The property in dispute are agricultural plots Nos. 13, 82 and 157 situated in villages Malikpur Mishripur and plots Nos. 532, 533, 534 and 530 situated in village Sahupur and one room. It is alleged by him that the petitioner is the owner in possession of the said land and the room. That the petitioner got the land through Will of his father. That opp. parties claimed possession of the same on the basis of some forged transfer deeds. The report was called and the police of P.S. Bidhuna on 11.9.97 reported that there is apprehension of breach of peace and therefore the order under Section 145(1) Cr.P.C. was passed on 18.9.97 and the land and crops were attached by an order under Section 146(1) Cr.P.C. of that date.
(3.) THEREAFTER an application was moved by Sahdeo Singh and other opp. parties for dropping the proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C. It was alleged by them that the land was purchased by the opp. parties from the petitioner. That the petitioner filed suit No. 171 of 1997 in the court of Civil Judge, Etawah. That in that suit the application of the petitioner for temporary injunction has been rejected. Therefore, the petitioner cannot be held to be in possession. It was further pleaded that parallel proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C. and a civil suit regarding the same property cannot proceed and therefore, the proceedings should be dropped. The learned S.D.M. Bidhuna by an order dated 27.4.98, Annexure 10 to the petition, dropped the proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C. However, he ordered that the property shall remain in attachment to maintain status quo and the Station Officer will maintain law and order at the spot. Against that order Sahdeo Singh and others filed Criminal Revision No. 144 of 1998, which was allowed on 18.11.97 by the IV Additional Sessions Judge, Etawah and the order of the Magistrate dated 27.4.98 was set aside and the property was released from attachment. Aggrieved by it, the present petition has been filed.;