Petitioner challenged an order invoking dispute resolution powers under Sections 145 and 146 Cr.P.C. due to a pending civil suit for possession. The High Court held no breach of peace existed and allowed the restorative application.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Crl. Misc. No. M-14658 of 2011 (O&M)
-: 1 :-
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. No. M-14658 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: May 20, 2013.
Satbir Singh
... Petitioner(s)
v.
Gurmukh Singh and others
... Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH
Present: Shri Rahul Vats, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Shri Deepak Girotra, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana.
Paramjeet Singh, J. (Oral):
Crl. Misc. No.26216 of 2013
For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and Crl. Misc. No.M-14658 of 2011 is restored to its original number and file.
Crl. Misc. No.M-14658 of 2011
In this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 3.11.2010 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jind (Annexure P-1) and restoration of order dated 3.11.2009 passed by learned SDM, Safidon (Annexure P-2) whereby he attached the land by invoking the provisions of Section 145 Cr.P.C. and appointed Tehsildar, Safidon as receiver under Section 146 Cr.P.C. on Kalendra moved by SHO, Police Station Safidon.
The undisputed facts are that the private respondents were in
Crl. Misc. No. M-14658 of 2011 (O&M) -: 2 :-
possession of the disputed land and the petitioner has filed a civil suit for possession and mesne profits against the private respondents. It is further an admitted position that the petitioner is a resident of village Juwan in District Sonepat whereas the private respondents are residents of village Dharamgarh in District Jind. In these circumstances when there is no apprehension of breach of peace, there was no reason or occasion for the SHO, Police Station Safidon to present kalendra under Section 145 Cr.P.C. and consequently, the learned SDM should not have invoked the powers under Sections 145 & 146 Cr.P.C.
Admittedly, in this case possession has not been wrested forcibly from one party by another party and the learned SDM has not decided question of possession while passing the impugned order. It is the case of the petitioner himself that he has filed a civil suit for possession which is pending adjudication before a civil court. Learned Additional Sessions Judge has considered the entire evidence on record and has categorically recorded a finding that other party is proceeding in accordance with law for taking possession, hence, there was no apprehension of breach of peace and application of Sections 145 & 146 Cr.P.C. is unwarranted. Learned Additional Sessions Judge correctly set aside the order of learned SDM.
Consequently, present petition, being bereft of merit, is
dismissed.
Paramjeet Singh ] Judge
May 20, 2013. kadyan
2 issues framed by the court
Whether there was an apprehension of breach of peace justifying the invocation of Sections 145 and 146 Cr.P.C. by the SDM.
Whether the Additional Sessions Judge correctly set aside the order invoking dispute resolution machinery under Cr.P.C. in a case pending before a civil court.
3 provisions across 1 enactments
Satbir Singh
Gurmukh Singh and others
Paramjeet Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
