VISHWANATH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ONE Vishwanath filed a complaint against Harnam Singh accused under Section 448 I. P. C. alleging that the accused had committed criminal trespass over a portion of an abadi plot belonging to him with intent to intimidate insult or annoy him. The trial court convicted the accused under Section 447 I. P. C and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month the court held that the complainant was entitled to be restored to possession and accordingly ordered delivery of possession of the property to him under Section 522 Cr. P. C.

(2.) HARNAM Singh accused filed an appeal against his conviction and the learned Civil and Sessions Judge set aside the conviction holding that the possession of the accused was not wrongful and that he has been in continuous and peaceful possession of the property from before. In the result the appellate court ordered redelivery of possession of the property to the accused under Sections 522/423 Cr. P. C.

(3.) THE complainant then filed an application in revision in this Court challenging the legality of the order passed by the learned Civil and Sessions Judge and contended that the lower appellate court had no jurisdiction to redeliver possession of the property to the accused. The learned Single Judge, who heard the revision, noticed two conflicting Single Judge decisions of this Court in Ram Prasad v. State, AIR 1958 All 159 and Malkhan Singh v. Emperor, AIR 1945 All 226 as to the powers of the appellate court while acting under Section 522/423 Cr. P C. to order re-delivery of possession to the accused, has referred the following question for decision to a larger Bench: