FARZAND ALI Vs. SHAUKAT ALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tanda, had before him a proceeding pending under Section 145 of the Criminal P. C. As the Magistrate was unable to decide as to which of the parties was in possession of the disputed property at the relevant time, he made a reference to the Civil Court under Section 146 (1} of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The reference was decided by the Munsif of Akbarpur and he transmitted his finding thereon to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate on receipt of that finding disposed of the proceeding before him in conformity with the decision of the Civil Court. Against that order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate an application in revision was filed before the Sessions Judge, Faizabad. The Sessions Judge dismissed the application on the ground that in view of an authority of this Court, the finding of the Civil Court could not be challenged in revision not only against that particular finding, but also in revision against the final order passed by the Magistrate on the basis of that finding. A contrary view of a Full Bench of the Patna High Court was cited before him but he being bound by the view of the Allahabad High Court could not help the applicant before him.

(2.) IT is in these circumstances that an application was filed in revision before this Court. The matter came up before a learned single Judge of this Court who referred it to a Division Bench and that Bench finding in conflict of authority of this Court on the point in Ram Govind Singh v. Ram Nath, 1967 All WR (HC) 8 and Syed Hasan v. Munsif Havali Lucknow, 1967 All WR (HC) 448 these two being the only authorities cited before that Bench, referred the matter to a Full Bench. That is how the matter comes up before us.

(3.) THE short point to be decided in the case is as to whether when a reference is made to a Civil Court under Section 146 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure can the finding of the Civil Court which cannot be challenged in appeal, revision or review be challenged in revision against the order of the Magistrate after he has disposed of the proceeding before him under Section 145 in conformity with that finding?