- (1.) HEARD counsel for both the parties.
(2.) SINCE both the applications have been filed against the order dated 11-10-2005 by which the property has been at tached by the City Magistrate and fur ther the receiver disposed them without following the procedure of law, both are being decided together. By the present application no. 1009 of 2006 filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the ap plicant has prayed for quashing the or der dated 23rd November, 2006 passed by the revisional Court as well as order dated 30-09-2006 passed by the City Magistrate, Haridwar as well as order dated 11-10-2005 by which the property has been attached by the City Magistrate and further the receiver dispossessed them without following the procedure of law. By the application no. 896 of 2006, the applicant- Virendra Kumar has sought the following relief: "it is, therefore, Most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to allow this application and the proceedings of Case No. 06 of 2004 under Section 145 Cr. P. C. State Vs. Kailash Charan and others and impugned order dated 11-10-2006 passed by City Magistrate Haridwar thereon under section 146 (1) Cr. P. C. and order dated 30-10-2006 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge IInd F. T. C. Haridwar in Criminal Revision No. 102 of 2006 Virendra Kumar Vs. Kailash Charan and others may kindly be quashed.
(3.) ACCORDING to Sukhvir Sharma, he is a tenant of the premises and appli cation under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was filed by one Kailash Charan without disclosing that Sukhvir Sharma is a tenant. When Sukhvir Sharma came to know that some proceedings are going on before the City Magistrate, he moved an appli cation for impleadment. The application for impleadment was rejected by the City Magistrate, Haridwar on 29-09-2006 and was directed to be listed for orders on 11-10-2006 under Section 146 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. On 11-10-2006, the order was passed to the following effect : Hindi;