Ram Krishna Gautam,J. - (1.) This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by applicant Anoop Keshari alias Anoop Chowdhary against State of U.P. and three others with a prayer for quashing impugned order dated 24.12.2019 passed u/s 146(1) Cr.P.C. as well as impugned order dated 28.11.2019 passed u/s 145(1) Cr.P.C. by the City Magistrate, Allahabad, in Case No. D-201902030007120 of 2019, Pratap Narain Mishra v. Anoop Keshari and others, P.S. Kotwali, District Allahabad, as well as entire proceeding of above mentioned case.
(2.) Learned counsel for applicant argued that the matter in question was not with regard to ownership and possession of any individual immovable property. Rather property in question is of Arya Samaj Temple having two colleges running with it and it is belonging of Arya Pratinidhi Sabha, U.P., Lucknow, under general superintendence of Sarvdeshik Arya Pratinidhi Sabha, New Delhi, for whole of India since mid of 19th century and everybody is having right and use to worship in above temple. There occurred no apprehension of breach of peace regarding above Arya Samaj Temple because O.P. No. 2 as well as applicant use to visit and worship in above temple. The dispute was regarding office of management and O.P. No. 2 was Secretary. In the year 2017 election of office bearers took place wherein the applicant was elected as Mantri to manage the affairs of above Arya Samaj Temple and its allied subject at Allahabad. This was duly recognized by State Unit at Lucknow. Representation was made by O.P. No. 2, but it was rejected by State Level Unit. In between two cases regarding criminal breach of trust and other mismanagement of property of Society, Arya Pratinidhi Sabha, was got lodged against O.P. No. 2 and one Pawan Jaiswal, wherein other co-accused preferred a proceeding u/s 482 Cr.P.C. before this court, which was rejected. Then after a Special Leave Petition was filed before Apex Court where the S.L.P. was rejected. Only after this failure to have some relief, manipulation was made by O.P. No. 2 under connivance with local police as well as Executive Magistrate. Thereafter a proceeding u/s 107/116 Cr.P.C. was undertaken and on this, report for proceeding u/s 145 Cr.P.C. was submitted before the City Magistrate wherein likelihood of breach of peace in Arya Samaj Temple, Chowk, Allahabad, was reported and the Magistrate in a routine way issued notices to both sides fixing a date. Though, there was no apprehension of breach of peace nor it was an individual immovable property, requiring any interference by Executive Magistrate u/s 145 Cr.P.C. Moreso, a civil suit was also pending on behalf of O.P. No. 2 for determination of right of Secretaryship of Management Committee of Arya Samaj Temple, Chowk, Allahabad, and its allied property. But the learned Magistrate, without applying his judicial mind, passed the impugned order u/s 145(1) Cr.P.C. Both sides appeared before the City Magistrate, therein, documents with reply were filed, wherein, it was specifically mentioned that no dispute regarding ownership or possession of immovable property of Arya Samaj Temple, Chowk, Allahabad, is there, because the Temple is under ownership of Almighty and worship of deities are done by each member belonging to Arya Samaj. The dispute was regarding office of management of Temple and it is within the domain of Assistant Registrar, Societies, as Arya Samaj Temple, Chowk, Allahabad, is a registered Society registered under Societies Registration Act. In case there arises a dispute regarding Management of the Society, it is to be referred to the Sub Divisional Magistrate concerned, who will decide the same. But the learned City Magistrate without making any appreciation of facts and law; by giving any reason, passed the impugned order of attachment of the Temple as well School Property of Arya Samaj Temple, Chowk, Allahabad, under section 146(1) Cr.P.C. whereby work of receivership has been assigned to consignee (supurdagar), which was not within the jurisdiction of the City Magistrate. The dispute regarding office of Management of a Society is to be resolved either by its State Unit or by Central Unit regarding its internal management or by the Assistant Registrar, Societies, under the Societies Registration Act and in case of its failure, reference is to be made under Rule 4 of the Societies Registration Act to the Court of Sub Divisional Magistrate concerned, who will decide as per rules given in the Societies Registration Act. But the learned City Magistrate did not give any reason and without applying its judicial mind passed the impugned order of attachment u/s 146(1) Cr.P.C. and appointed a receiver. It was a mechanical order. It is apparently under abuse of process of law. Hence this application with above prayer.
(3.) Learned counsel for O.P. No. 2 vehemently opposed the application with contention that O.P. No. 2 is elected Secretary of Committee of Management of Arya Samaj Temple, Chowk, Allahabad, and he was rightly in the office of Management, for which, effort was made by applicant for dispossessing him. Owing to which apprehension of breach of peace was reported by the police to the Executive Magistrate. The jurisdiction u/s 145(1) Cr.P.C. was invoked by the City Magistrate, Allahabad, following the order of attachment u/s 146(1) Cr.P.C. It was well in accordance with law with no abuse of process of law. However, it is being admitted that the property is of Arya Samaj Temple, district Unit Allahabad, open for worship to everybody. The property of Arya Samaj Temple, unit Allahabad, is property of Almighty. Hence, there is no dispute regarding ownership and possession of the property. Rather the dispute is regarding office of management of the Unit. If this Court directs the City Magistrate for disposal of proceeding then O.P. No. 2 is having no objection.;