- (1.) G. D. Dube, J. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) THIS revision is against the order of Second Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehpur. The learned Sessions Judge has ahowed the revision and set aside the order of Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Bindki, district Fatehpur. He has remanded the case to the lower Court for further proceedings. An affidavit has been filed by the revisionist before this Court stating that con solidation proceedings have started in the village. It was, therefore, urged that as the consolidation proceedings are still pending and the subject-matter is in dispute in the said proceedings, the case under Section 145, Cr. P. C. cannot proceed. My attention was drawn to paragraph 10 of the counter-affidavit, wherein it has been admitted that in the consolidation proceedings this subject-matter is in dispute.
(3.) FROM the document annexed with the affidavit filed by the revisionist, it transpires that the notification under Section 4 of the Consolidation of Holdings Act was issued on 9-1-1985. The preliminary order under Section 145, Cr. P. C. was drawn on 23rd March, 1985. Considering the above view of the matter as the parties are now seeking their redress in the consolidation Court, there appears to be no justification to continue the proceedigns under Section 145, Cr. P. C. The revisional Court was also of the view that if the parties ware co-sharers, there was no Justification to proceed under Section 145, Cr. P. C.;