Gangeshwar Prasad, J. - (1.) THIS rit petition has come up before us upon reference made by a learned single udge of this Court.
(2.) UNDER Section 53 of the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), each of the petitioners was ordered by the Nyaya Panchayat of village Khewali, district Varanasi, to ex ecute a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50 with one surety of like amount for keeping the peace for a period of fifteen days. The order of the Nyaya Panchayat provided that in case of default in ex ecuting the required bond a penalty of Rs. 5 per day shall be imposed on each defaulting petitioner. Against that order the petitioners filed an application in re vision under Section 89'of the Act before the Sub- Divisional Magistrate Varanasi (S) who dismissed it on the ground that no revision lay. The view that the Magis trate took was that an order under Sec tion 53 is not an order in a "criminal case" as denned in the Act and is. ac cordingly, not revisable under Sec. 89. In taking this view he followed the decision of Mehrotra, J. in Girwar Singh v. Sub-Divisional Magistrate Writ No. 753 of 1954 decided on March 11, 1955 (All). By means of this petition the petitioners pray for a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the orders of the Nyaya Pancha yat and the Sub-Divisional Magistrate. The learned single Judge before whom the writ petition originally came up for hearing found some difficulty in accepting the opinion expressed by Mehrotra, J. in the above decision and that led to the reference. The relevant portion of Section 89 of the Act runs as follows: "Section 89 (1)- A Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Munsif or Sub-Divisional Of ficer, according as it is a criminal, civil or revenue case, may either on his own motion or on the application of any party made within 60 days from the date of the order complained of or where personal service of summons had not been effected on the applicant from the date of the knowledge of the order call for the record of any case which has been decided by a Nyaya Panchayat and if it appears to him that injustice or material irregularity has occurred, he may make such order in the case as he thinks fit. (2) *** *** *** (3) *** *** *** (4) Except as aforesaid, a decree of] order passed by a Nyaya Panchayat in any ; civil, criminal or revenue case shall not be open to appeal or revision in any Court."
(3.) THE expressions "criminal case", "civil case" and "revenue case" have all been defined in Section 2 of the Act. Ac cording to the definition, "Criminal case" means a criminal proceeding in respect of i an offence triable by a Nyaya Panchayat I Certainly, a proceeding under Section 53 cannot be said to be a proceeding in res pect of an offence triable by a Nyaya PanchaVat and if the revisional power of Sub- Divisional Magistrate is regarded as confined to a criminal case as denned in the Act the conclusion that an order under Section 53 is not revisable is cor rect. The question, however, is whether the revisional power can properly be re garded as so confined.;