RANI PUSHPALATHA Vs. SUB-DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE (NORTH)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Revision Case is directed against the order dated 01.04.2008 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate (North), Puducherry, i.e., the first respondent vide his proceedings in M.C.No.107 of 2008.

(2.) The brief case of the revision petitioners is as follows:-

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners mainly contended that the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate (North), Puducherry, invoked the jurisdiction under Section 133 of Cr.P.C. in a pure civil dispute. Hence, the order passed by the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate (North), Puducherry, is erroneous and not valid in law and it is liable to be set aside. The proceedings under Section 133 of Cr.P.C. is only a nature of civil proceedings and in the case on hand, the first respondent/Sub Divisional Magistrate, has completely omitted to took into the issue from the above said angle as the sum and substance of the issue is purely a civil dispute between the parties and erroneously passed an order which is liable to be set aside. The proceedings under Section 133 of Cr.P.C. was initiated by the first respondent not on receiving any report from the police officer, but only based on the complaint given by the second respondent alone, who preferred the complaint to settle the property dispute between the parties. Hence, the trial Court not followed the principles of law laid down by this Court in similar case.