SUNDARA BAI Vs. LAXMI BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Revision Petition, one under Sec. 397 read with S. 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (the Code) is directed against the order, dated 24th June 1983 passed by the Sessions Judge at Bidar in Criminal Revision Petition No. 8/1982 allowing the revision and setting aside the order dated 6-2-1982 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (S.D.M.) in file No. RD/MAC/CR-25/81-82 and remanding the matter to him with a direction to hold a proper enquiry as contemplated by law and dispose of the matter as early as possible.

(2.) The facts leading up to filing this Revision Petition may briefly be stated as under: The Sub-Inspector of Police Chitguppa of Humnabad Taluk submitted F.I.R. on 5-1-1982 in Crime No. 3/1982 stating inter alia that there was a dispute between the first party members Smt. Laxmi Bai and Smt. Champa Bai on one hand and the second party member Smt. Sundra Bai on the other in respect of a land bearing Sv. No. 4/A of Hankuni village in Humnabad Taluk, Bidar District; that on 3-1-1982 he had received a complaint from Sundra Bai, the member of the second party stating that she has been in possession of the disputed land and the members of the first party are trying to dispossess her from the land in-question; that the Sub-Inspector of Police visited the village on 3-1-1982 and made an enquiry into the complaint; that during his enquiry he found out that one Eknath s/o Bhavrao was the landlord of the disputed land; that he has 3 major sons Anna Rao, Appa Rao and Bhima Rao and sister Smt. Sundra Bai; that during the enquiry it was noticed that both the parties were claiming ownership and trying to take possession of the disputed land; that there was standing sugarcane crop on the disputed land; that there was every possibility or likelihood of breach of peace and tranquillity and blood-shed for taking possession of the disputed land by the rival parties and on these grounds he requested the S.D.M. to initiate proceedings under Sec. 145 of the Code and the subject of dispute may be attached and kept in the custody and possession of the Court with the standing crop. The S.D.M. passed a preliminary order dated 16-1-1982 and directed both the parties to file their respective claims on or before 22-1-1982. However, the case came up for preliminary hearing on 6-2-82. On that day, the Counsel for the first-party filed certain documents and also affidavits into the Court whereas Sundra Bai filed a petition seeking time on the ground that her Counsel had gone to Hyderabad for treatment. The S.D.M. at this stage passed an order in exercise of his powers conferred upon him under Sec. 146 of the Code attaching the disputed land with the standing crop thereon and appointing the Tahsildar Humnabad as receiver in respect of the disputed land until further orders with certain directions to the receiver as to what he should do concerning the disputed land and the Sugarcane crop standing thereon.

(3.) The members of the first party carried the matter in revision before the Sessions Judge at Bidar in Criminal Revision Petition No. 8/1982 assailing the validity and the correctness of the said order. The Sessions Judge after hearing the parties and going through the records, passed an order dated 24-6-1983 allowing the revision petition and setting aside the order and remanded the matter to the S.D.M. for fresh disposal in accordance with law.