J.P.Chaturvedi - (1.) THIS is a. revision against a judgment and order of the learned Sessions Judge, Saharanpur in Criminal Revision No. 98 of 1980, allowing the revision and ordering the S. D. M. Roorkee to direct the Station Officer concerned "to ensure that the tractor in question is taken out through the disputed land and for that purpose the walls raised on the disputed land be dismantled."
(2.) THE facts giving rise to this revision are that on 7-11-1979 the police reported to the S. D. M. Roorkee that opposite party No. 2 was raising walls around the disputed land through which Sadhu Ram had a right of ingress and egress. THE land in dispute was situate to the south of the house of opposite parties Shadu Ram, Kali Ram and Banarsi Dass. It is alleged that Mela Ram surrounded this land by walls on all the four sides and thereby obstructed the passage for the tractor of the opposite parties. A preliminary order under the provisions of Section 145 CrPC was passed by the Magistrate on 15-11-1979. THEn Sadhu Ram moved an application in the Court (of the Learned S. D. M. Roorkee, praying that the walls raised by Mela Ram be dismantled so that his tractor could pass through the land. THE learned Magistrate dismissed the application. THEreupon Sadhu Ram filed a revision in the Court of Sessions. THE learned Sessions Judge passed the impugned order. Aggrieved against the said order Mela Ram has come in revision before this Court. The dispute between the parties relates to a piece of land which is situate to the south of the house belonging to the opposite parties Sadhu Ram, Kali Ram and Banarsi Dass. As already stated, Sadtou Ram and others alleged that they used the land as passage for their tractor. Learned counsel for the applicant Mela Ram has contended that the present order of the learned Sessions Judge was without Jurisdiction, inasmuch as it has no sanction of the provisions of Sectian 145 CrPC. In this connection, the provisions of the various sub-sections of Section 145 of the CrPC may be cursorily examined. Sub-section (1) empowers an Executive Magistrate to make an order in writing, stating the grounds of his satisfaction that a dispute likely to cause a breach of the peace exists, concerning any land or water or the boundaries thereof, requiring the parties concerned to attend his Court in person or by pleader on a specified date and time, and put in written statement of their respective claims as respects the fact of actual possession of the subject of dispute.
(3.) SUB-section (2) states that the expression "land or water" includes buildings, markets, fisheries, crops or other produce of land, and the rents or profits of any such property. Subsection (3) lays down that the preliminary order, as it is popularly called under sub-section (1), shall be served in the manner provided for the service of a summons.;