OM PRAKASH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NONE appear for the revisionists. Heard Sri K. S. Verma learned counsel for respondents private party.

(2.) PROCEEDINGS under section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (herein ­after referred as the Code) were initiated by the Sub Divisional Magistrate. Ag ­grieved, the present private party respond ­ents filed a revision before the Sessions Judge which was decided on merit and the proceedings drawn under section 145 (1) of the Code by the S.D.M. were quashed. The ground for the same was that the property was joint and partition suit filed under section 176 of the U. P Act No. 1 of 1951 was already pending disposal in a competent revenue court. Now the par ­tition suit has been decided on 29.7.2003, copy of the judgment is Annexure-1 to the supplementary affidavit. Further the village is under the consolidation proceedings and the gazette notification Annexure-2 has also been filed with the supplementary affidavit. The village is mentioned at se ­rial No. 61 namely Mubarikpur Alipur in the said notification and the property in dispute is situate there. Considering this the proceedings under section 145 (1) of the Code were not legally justified and the learned Sessions Judge made no error in having these proceedings quashed under the revisional jurisdiction.