N.N. Mathur, J. - (1.) By way of instant petition u/s. 482 Cr.P.C. the petitioner has challenged the order dated 25.3.2004 passed by the Sessions Judge, Bikaner attaching the subject property in proceedings u/ss. 145 & 146 Cr.P.C.
(2.) Briefly stated that facts of the case are that there is dispute between the petitioner-Rajendra Singh and the second respondent-Vikram Singh both the sons of late Richhpal Singh. The dispute has arisen after the death of the mother namely Laxmi Devi. It appears that the SHO, Police Station, Sadar filed a complaint in the Court of Additional District Magistrate, Bikaner on 19.12.2002 complaining that serious dispute has arisen between the parties with respect to a piece of land belonged to late Richhpal Singh. Notice of the complaint was given to the parties. The learned Magistrate by order dated 7.1.2003 passed an order of attachment of the subject property under the provisions of Section 146(1) Cr.P.C. It further appears that a civil suit was also pending between the parties wherein on 10.2.2003 an order of maintaining the status quo with respect to the subject property was passed. The matter came up before the revisional Court twice. On both the times the matter was sent back to the be Court of Additional District Magistrate to pass fresh order.
(3.) I have perused the order dated 25.3.2004. It is not in dispute that prior to the initiation of the proceedings the parties were already bound down u/ss. 107, 116 Cr.P.C. to maintain peace. In such circumstances it cannot be said that there existed apprehension of likely breach of peace. In my view, there was no compelling reasons for the Magistrate to pass order of attachment. The impugned order is ex-facie illegal and void and such deserves to be quashed and set aside.;