IRSHAD AHMAD Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application in revision arises out of the proceedings under Section 147, Cr. P. C. It appears that on the report of the station Officer Kotwali that there existed a dispute between the Hindu and Muslim sections of the community, on the question of user of Sati Ka Math, which was likely to endanger and generate communal tension, proceedings under Section 147, Cr. P. C. were undertaken. Since the case was considered of emergency, a prayer was also made for the attachment of the disputed property during the enquiry. The Magistrate passed an order on the receipt of the report as follows:

(2.) I have heard learned Counsel for the applicant and have also perused the impugned orders. It is very strenuously contended by the applicant's counsel that the Magistrate had no power under B. 147, Cr. P. C. to attach the disputed property since under this section only a right of user of property is involved. Learned Counsel for the applicant has placed before me the entire Section 147, Cr. P. C, On its basis he has argued that if the Magistrate is satisfied from a Police report or other information that the dispute is likely to cause breach of peace, regarding the right of user of land or water, he shall make an order in writing stating the grounds of his satisfaction and requiring the parties to the dispute to attend his court and to file their written statements in support of their respective claims. Learned Counsel has urged that under Section 147 (2) the Magistrate is then required to peruse the statement and to hear the parties and to receive all such evidence as may be produced before him and then decide the rights of the parties, as they existed on the date. Under Sub-section (2) of Section 147, Cr. P. C. , the learned Counsel has argued that the Magistrate can pass a final order prohibiting interference with the exercise of such right. The submission is that on a reading of this section no inference can be drawn that it empowers the Magistrate to pass any interim order attaching the property in dispute during the pendency of the enquiry before him.

(3.) I have given my serious consideration to the submissions made by the applicant's counsel. But unfortunately I do not find myself in agreement with him. Section 147 (1 A) Cr. P. C. reads as follows: