JANGI LAL Vs. DWARKA PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Proceeding was initiated at the instance of the applicant (Jangi Lal) in respect of plot No.133 (0.57 acres) situated in village Molangpur, police Station Sarai Khwaja, district Jaunpur, under S.145, Code of Criminal Procedure. Preliminary order was drawn by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate Sadar, Jaunpur dated March 24, 1978. On application of Jangi Lal the standing crop of wheat on the said plot was attached and handed over in the custody of Babu Nandan as Superdar on April 4, 1978, through the medium of the Station Officer with a direction to harvest, the crop and produce the sale proceeds in the court when asked for. During the pendency of the proceedings Jangi Lal obtained from the custody of the Superdar the wheat crop and hay on Nov. 9 1979, though there was no order of the Magistrate to this effect. Upon this being brought to the notice of the Magistrate, he estimated the value of the property at Rs. 905/- only after hearing the parties on 27th March, 1980 and directed the applicant (Jangi Lal) to deposit the amount. A revision filed by the applicant against that order was dismissed by the Sessions Judge on July 10, 1980. Despite this there was no desposit made by the applicant whereafter on Nov. 14, 1980 the Magistrate issued warrant of attachment of movables to the value of Rs. 905/- belonging to the applicant. The applicant preferred a revision against this order which was dismissed on 14th August, 1981 by the Sessions Judge. Aggrieved, the applicant has filed this application under section 482 of the Code

(2.) Upon the matter coming up for hearing before a learned single Judge on 17th Jan. 1986, doubt arose with respect to the correctness of the opinion expressed in certain decisions of learned Single Judges of this Court and on that account the case has been referred to a larger Bench. This is how the application is now before us for decision.

(3.) Learned counsel contends that there is no provision in the Code of Criminal Procedure empowering Magistrate to direct deposit of equivalent value in terms of money for the property placed in the custody of the Superdar in proceedings under S.145, Cr. P.C. The Magistrate, it is urged, had no jurisdiction to direct the applicant to deposit Rs. 905/-. In case there is offence committed by the applicant, he could be proceeded against criminally, but the determination of the equivalent value or the recovery thereof could be had only in the civil court. Upon careful consideration we have found ourselves unable to subscribe to this proposition.