Kalyan Dutta, J. - (1.) This is an application in revision filed by Vipin Prakash and Suresh Kumar against an order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar, dated May 23, 1977, whereby the order of the Assistant Collector and Executive Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar, dated November 25, 1975, attaching the subject of dispute until a competent court has determined the rights of the parties thereto with regard to the person entitled to the possession thereof was set aside and the application of the applicants under section 145, Cr. P. C. was dismissed and the possession of the land in dispute was ordered to be delivered to the non-applicants from the receiver.
(2.) The short facts giving rise to this revision application may be stated as follows:- Vipin Prakash and Suresh Kumar, hereinafter referred to as party No. 1, presented an application before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar, for initiation of proceedings under section 145, Cr. P. C. against Surja Ram, Arjun Ram and Mohniya, hereinafter referred-to as party No. 2. It was alleged in the application that an agricultural land measuring 24 Bighas and 10 Biswas comprised in Murabba in Murabba No. 11 situated in Chak 84 Choti Tehsil, District Sri Ganganagar, belonged to the father of party No. 1. The land was partitioned by the father of party No. 1 on May 30, 1970, along with other properties. Out of this land, 12 Bighas and 5 Biswas fell to the share of Vipin Prakash and the other half went to the share of Suresh Kumar who are both members of party No. 1. After the partition, party No. 1, cultivated the land which fell to their respective shares. In the Rabi Season of the year 1974-75, they cultivated wheat crops therein. The members of party No. 2 wanted to grab the land. So they started threatening party No. 1 with dire consequences, if they did not leave the land and handed it over to the former, Party No. 1, thereupon made a report to the police that party No. 2 was bent upon committing breach of the peace. The police called for party No. 2 and asked them not to disturb the peace. Thereupon, members of party No. 2 assured party No. 1 in the presence of the police authorities and respectable persons of the locality that they would not do any such act as may result in breach of the peace. In spite of this assurance members of party No. 2 made an attempt to dispossess party No. 1 from the land in dispute. Party No. 1 was, however, rescued by Ashok Kumar and his companions and in this manner the attempt of party No. 2 to take forcible possession of the land was foiled. The party No. 1, therefore, presented an application for initiation of proceedings under section 145, Cr. P. C. against party No. 2 in the court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, who later on transferred it to the court of the Assistant Collector and Executive Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar. The application was supported by the affidavits of Barkat Ram, Ashok Kumar, Khan Chand and Vipin Prakash, applicant.
(3.) The Executive Magistrate First Class was satisfied after going through the application and the affidavits that a dispute likely to cause a breach of the peace existed concerning the land. He, therefore, passed an order in writing stating the grounds of his being so satisfied and requiring the parties concerned in such dispute to attend his court and to put in written statements of their respective claims as respects the fact of actual possession of the land under controversy. As the case was considered to be one of emergency, the learned Magistrate attached the disputed land and appointed the Tehsildar as receiver thereof. Party No. 2 appeared before the leasned Magistrate and filed a written statement wherein they claimed to be in peaceful possession of the land in dispute. It was further stated in the written reply that a suit under section 108 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act is pending in the court of the Assistant Collector, Sri Ganganagar, in respect of the possession of the disputed land and in that suit a temporary injunction has been issued on June 13, 1975, restraining party No. 1 from causing any interference with the possession of party No. 2.;