- (1.) B. K. Rathi, J. This is a revision under Section 397, Cr. P. C. against the order dated 11-8-98 passed by the IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Bijnor in Criminal Revision No. 101 of 1998.
(2.) I have heard Sri Rahul Sripat, learned Counsel for the applicant and Sri H. N. Sharma, learned Counsel for the op posite parties. The facts of the case are that the orders under Sections 145 (1) and 146 (1), Cr. P. C. were passed by the S. D. M. Dhampur, these orders were challenged in the above criminal revision by opposite party No. 3. The revision has been allowed by the impugned order and both the orders have been quashed. Aggrieved by it, the present revision has been preferred. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the revisionist that both the orders were interlocutory and it is an es tablished law that no revision is main tainable against the interlocutory orders and the revision is barred by mischief of clause (2) of Section 397, Cr. P. C. That the revision was not maintainable and the learned Additional Sessions Judge erred in allowing the revision. The perusal of the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge shows that he allowed the revision on the ground that the consolidation proceedings have started in the village and the dispute regarding possession of the property in dispute is before the con solidation authority. However, no order of the consolidation authority was placed on the record by which the dispute between them might have been decided or any find ing regarding possession of any particular party might have been recorded. The pen dency of consolidation proceedings does not bar proceedings under Section 145, Cr. P. C. The proceeding under Section 145, Cr. P. C. can be held and the possession can be decided unless there is a decision of the consolidation Court or the Civil Court regarding possession of the parties.
(3.) CONSIDERING the arguments of the parties, lam, therefore, of the view that the learned Additional Sessions Judge has erred in allowing the revision and drop ping the orders under Section 145 (1) and 146 (1) Cr. P. C. The revision is, therefore, fit to be allowed. The revision is allowed and the order of the Addl. Sessions Judge, Bijnor passed in Crimiinal Revision No. 101 of 1998 is quashed. Revision allowed. .;