V. ANAND Vs. SUB DIVISION MAGISTRATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The first respondent passed an order in Na.Ka.A2/2694/2019 dated 03.06.2019 under Section 145 of Cr.P.C., on 03.06.2019 to keep door no.32/100B, Sri Anantha Bhavan Hotel under lock and key. Against the impugned order, the petitioner has preferred this Criminal Revision Case to set aside the impugned order.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is the absolute owner of the property in R.S.No.D5/237-2 with an extent of 4.707 cents and the petitioner is running a hotel in the name of 'Sri Anantha Bhavan Hotel' in the said property in door No.32/100B Main Road, Marthandam Post, Kanyakumari District and the petitioner has obtained GST, Professional Tax, Property tax, Possession Certificate, Electricity Service Connection in his name. On 21.05.2019 at 09.00 a.m., the third respondent who is the owner of the Mubharak Hotel, which is situated adjacent to the petitioner's hotel tried to disturb the possession of the property and he and his men attacked the petitioner and caused injuries. The petitioner lodged a complaint before the second respondent in Crime No.188 of 2019 under Sections 147, 148, 447, 427, 294(b), 324 and 506(ii) of IPC. The third respondent filed a case against the petitioner in Crime No.187 of 2019. The matter was referred to the first respondent by the second respondent. The first respondent conducted enquiry under Section 145(1) of Cr.p.C., and after enquiry, he passed the impugned order. Against the impugned order, the petitioner preferred this revision.

(3.) On the side of the petitioner, it is stated that in the impunged order, the first respondent has made an observation that the property belong to the petitioner. The closure of the hotel was ordered only based on the cases in Crime Nos.187 of 2019 and 188 of 2019. Both the cases were subsequently closed on 16.07.2019 and 17.07.2019 respectively.