JAYAPRAKASH SAMANTARAY Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision filed by B Party (Counter Petitioner - 4) in M.C.No.421/2006 on the file of the Sub -Divisional Magistrate (North) at Pondicherry. Against the order passed by the learned executive Magistrate under Section 145(1) Cr.P.C., the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the order of the learned executive Magistrate does not reflect the 'satisfaction' about the disputed possession or likelihood of cause of breach of peace in the locality and the order does not reflect the ground of satisfaction of the learned Sub -Divisional Magistrate.

(2.) THE learned counsel appearing for the petitioner relied on the decision reported in A.I.R.1914 Madras 78 - between Subbarama Aiyar and another V. Mariya Pillai 1999(III) CTC 641 - between Selvaraju V. S.H.Officer, Nettapakkam Police Station, Nettapakkam and 2003(4)CTC 232 - between Ponnammal and another Vs.State, rep. By Revenue Inspector, Kinathukadavu and others.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the Respondents 1 and 2. Learned counsel for the 2nd respondent (A -Party) submitted that mere pending of Civil Suit would not affect the jurisdiction of the learned Executive Magistrate and the petitioner herein has not filed the suit.