- (1.) HEARD the parties.
(2.) A proceeding under Section 144 Cr.P.C. was initiated in between the petitioners and respondent nos. 7 to 9 with respect to a land, appertaining to Plot No. 183/1023 under Khata No. 7 of Village - Muramkala, Police Station and District Ramgarh, whereby, both the parties were restrained from going over the land, in dispute, but subsequently on 30.7.2007, the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Ramgarh passed a final order, whereby restrainment order passed against the first partyrespondent nos. 7 to 9, was vacated whereas, it was made absolute so far as the petitioners are concerned. Against that order, the petitioners preferred a criminal revision application before the Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh vide Cr. Revision No. 147 of 2007, which was heard on 21.9.2007, whereupon notices were ordered to be issued against the opposite parties and the case was ordered to be put up after appearance of the opposite parties and at the same time, the order was also passed to the effect that no coercive order will be passed or action will be taken against the parties. According to the petitioners, said order was communicated to the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate, Ramgarh, on the same day making a prayer not to proceed with the matter, but ignoring the order dated 21.9.2007, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh, the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Ramgarh forwarded an application, filed by respondent nos. 7 to 9, to the Circle Officer, Ramgarh for taking necessary action. Having received such application, the Circle Officer, Ramgarh made a request to Sub Divisional Magistrate, Ramgarh, to depute police force, so that the lock, put on the premises, be lifted. Thereafter, lock was opened and respondent nos. 7 to 9 were given possession of the premises, in dispute. Thereafter, the petitioners filed an application before the Deputy Commissioner, Ramgarh who asked the D.C.L.R., Ramgarh to make an enquiry and the D.C.L.R., Ramgarh after holding enquiry, reported the matter to the Deputy Commissioner vide its report dated 15.10.2007, to the effect that the lock, which had been put under the order of S.D.M., Ramgarh over the premises, has been opened on 23.9.2007, but no action was taken by the Deputy Commission, Ramgarh and, therefore, there was no option left with the petitioners but to approach this Court with a prayer to restore the possession of the petitioners, as the respondent without there being any authority and also in utter disregard of the order passed by the Sessions Judge has thrown the petitioners out of possession.
(3.) AS against this, learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 7 to 9 submits that, in fact, the property, over which proceeding was initiated, belongs to respondent no. 7, as he had purchased the same in his name and also in the name of his brothers - Amlok Singh and Rajendra Singh, who are said to have sold the property to the petitioners, though they had no authority to sell the property and that respondent no. 7 was never out of the possession, rather he had always been in possession from the date, when the property had been purchased by him and that the matter is pending for adjudication before the Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh and, therefore, the petitioners are not entitled to any relief sought for.;