SAMIKANNU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Inspector of Police, Sivaganga Taluk laid an information in crime No. 220/89 of Sivaganga Taluk Police Station, dated 22.7.1989 before the Executive Sub Divisional Magistrate, and Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivaganga alleging that there was dispute between A and B party - A party consisting of 21 persons and B party consisting of 22 persons - regarding possession, enjoyment and use of water for irrigation purpose in the well situate in S. No. 3/2 of P. Udayarendal group, Sivaganga Taluk, which was likely to disturb the peace and public tranquillity in the village, which was taken on file as M.C. No. 94/89.

(2.) After deriving subjective satisfaction as to the existence of a dispute, as referred to by the Inspector of Police, likely to result in breach of peace in the village, learned Executive Magistrate passed an order requiring A and B party - counter Petitioners to attend before her in person or pleader at 11 A.M. on 28.8.1989 at the office of the Executive Sub Divisional Magistrate and Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivaganga and put in written statements of their respective claims in regard to the disputed well in the aforesaid survey number. She also passed a further order directing the Inspector of Police, Sivaganga Taluk not to allow both the parties to enter upon the land in dispute (i.e., Land in S.N.3/2 of P. Udayarendal Group, Sivaganga Taluk) pending inquiry under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the Code').

(3.) On receipt of process, B party-counter Petitioners came forward with the present action by invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code to quash the proceedings initiated against them, impleading the Inspector of Police, Sivaganga Taluk, Sivaganga as the sole Respondent.