K.P.S.SANDHU, J. - (1.) THIS petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by Shri Madanjeet Singh praying therein that the proceedings under section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the order dated 8th May, 1985, passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sangrur, be quashed.
(2.) THE facts which gave rise to this petition are as follows. Some 40 bighas and 12 biswas of land and a kothi situated in village Mangwal in Sangrur district are owned by the petitioner and his brother Baljeet Singh respondent No. 2 in equal shares. This property had been gifted out to the two brothers by their mother Shrimati Gulwant Kaur in equal shares and thus the property was in the joint ownership of the petitioners and respondent No. 2. As both Madanjeet Singh petitioner and Baljeet Singh respondent were claiming to be in possession of the land in dispute, the local police made a report to the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sangrur, stating therein that there was a likelihood of breach of the peace, therefore proceedings under section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure be initiated. The trial Magistrate vide his impugned order dated 8th May, 1985 issued notice under section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and later on passed an order under section 146 of the Code of Criminal Procedure appointing a receiver in respect of the disputed property. The order appointing the receiver has not been challenged in this petition since it was passed subsequently to the filing of the petition. The short ground taken up by the petitioner in this petition is that the property was jointly owned by the petitioner and respondent No. 2 and that they were co-sharers. In this situation, no proceedings under section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure could be taken. To support this proposition the learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on Bhavan pal v. Prem Kumar Jain and others, 1982(1) C.L.R. 121, and Harbans Lal and Another v. Hans Raj and Others, 1980 C.L.R. (Pb. and Har.) 218, wherein it has been held that in a case of joint property proceedings under section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure initiated by the Magistrate would be misconceived. I think that this petition deserves to succeed on this short ground. Consequently, I quash the order of the Magistrate dated 8th May, 1985, and further proceedings resulting from the same. Petition succeeded.;