LAWS(KAR)-1951-9-8

VENKATEGOWDA Vs. APPAJIGOWDA

Decided On September 20, 1951
VENKATEGOWDA Appellant
V/S
APPAJIGOWDA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision petition against the order in Miscellaneous No. 16 of 47-48 dropping the proceedings under Section 145 Criminal Procedure Code, on the ground that both the parties are absent.

(2.) The proceedings were instituted on 18-11-1947 and it is in March 1951 that the proceedings were dropped on the ground referred to above. A perusal of the order sheet shows that the case was not taken up as the Judge was busy with other cases or for the reason that one or the other of the lawyers wanted an adjournment. It is unfortunate that these proceedings were allowed to be dragged on for about three years and it is equally unfortunate that the learned Magistrate should have found a way of disposing of the case in a summary manner, particularly when the learned Magistrate had no jurisdiction to drop the proceedings under Section 145, Criminal P.C. as he has done.

(3.) This case is typical of a good number of cases under Section 145 Criminal P.C. that are pending for a number of years after preliminary orders under that section. Though the provision of law under this section is intended for quick disposal of such cases, the reason for the pendency of such cases for an unduly long time is partly due to the lack of understanding as to what the Court has to do when parties do not help in the quick disposal of cases of this nature. The decisions on the point are sometimes conflicting as can be seen in any commentary on the Code of Criminal Procedure under Section 145. Some decisions go to the length of holding that the Magistrate is bound to manage to record some evidence before any final order under Section 145, Criminal P.C., or under Section 146 could be passed though the parties may not have adduced any evidence. It is desirable to analyse Sections 145 and 146, Criminal P.O., and consider how the Magistrate has to proceed in case the parties fail to co-operate in the speedy disposal of cases of this nature. Section 145 is as follows : "(1) Whenever .......... a Magistrate of the First Class is satisfied ...... ..that a dispute likely to cause a breach of the peace exists concerning any land ...... within the local limits of his jurisdiction, he shall make an order in writing, stating toe grounds of his being so satisfied, and requiring the parties concerned in such dispute to attend his Court in person or by Pleader, within a time to be fixed by such Magistrate, and to put in written statements of their respective claims as respects the fact of actual possession of the subject of dispute.