CHANDRAKALABAI Vs. SHARADCHANDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PARTY No. 1 Chandrakalabai, widow of Badrilal Paliwal, has filed this revision application praying that the record and proceedings of Criminal Revision No. 29 of 1970 of the Court of the Additional District Magistrate, Bhandara, arising out of an order dated September 17, 1970, passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate Bhandara, be called for and the orders passed by both the authorities be set aside.

(2.) THE facts in brief are as under: Applicant Chandrakala, party No. 1, is the widow of one Biharilal Paliwal. Shri Biharilal Paliwal held agricultural lands at village Sihora as well as at other villages, one of which is Bamni in the State of Madhya Pradesh. In this application we are concerned with the lands and a wada which has been numbered by the Gram Panchayat, Sihora as houses Nos. 2 to 7. Party No. 2 Sharadchandra was the nephew of Biharilal Paliwal. His genitive father Daulatram is the real brother of Biharilal. Sharadchandra, when he was a minor of 6 years was taken in adoption by Biharilal on February 16, 1956. It is further seen that Biharilal, during his lifetime, executed a Vyawasthapatra on July 25, 1956. This document is to be found at page 31 of the proceedings before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate. Under this document all the lands of Sihora which admeasure approximately 59 acres were given in the management of Sharadchandra till his lifetime. This arrangement was made during the lifetime of Biharilal himself. The name of Sharadchandra was mutated in the record of rights of these lands during the lifetime of Biharilal and Biharilal was shown as guardian of Sharadchandra, Sharadchandra being minor. Biharilal died on June 14, 1966. After the death of Biharilal, the name of Chandrakala, party No. 1 was entered in the revenue records as well as the Gram Panchayat records as the guardian of Sharadchandra. It is also common ground that Sharadchandra attained majority on February 10, 1960.

(3.) IT is the case of Chandrakala, party No. 1, that she was in exclusive possession of the fields and the houses at Sihora. It is her case that sometimes on January 11, 1969, she went to Najibgarh near Delhi for attending marriage ceremony at the house of her brother-in-law and while she was staying at Najibgarh, she received certain letters and a telegram from one of her servants by name Ramkishore, whom she had kept as a cook, who was residing on her behalf at the wada at Sihora along with her invalid brother. The wire was received to the effect that party No. 2 Sharadchandra and his father, i. e. genitive father Daulatram broke open the locks of the house and they have illegally taken possession of the house. After learning from this telegram, Chandrakala, party No. 1 wrote an Inland letter to the P. S. I. Tumsar. It was sent by registered post. It is dated February 4, 1969 and is to be found at record page 23, By this letter she intimated that she came to know at Najibgarh about party No. 2 and his genitive father taking forcible possession of her house. They had removed her invalid brother by forcibly putting him in a cart and expressed suspicion that they may even do away with his life. She further stated that her servant Ramkisore was also given threats and he was directed to leave the place. As nobody was in possession of the house, she was not in a position to state as to what property of her was stolen away or taken away by Sharadchandra from the house. In this letter she also referred to her first going to Bamni which is in Madhya Pradesh. I have already stated that Biharilal had landed property at Bamni also. It is seen from the proceedings that Chandrakala is the Sar Panch of Gram Panchayat of village Bamni. After this letter Chandrakala came to village Sihora and then sent letters to the authorities. She addressed an application to the D. S. P. , Bhandara on March 3, 1969 which is to be found at page 27 of the proceedings. She has reported what she stated in the application. Thereafter we find that she has made some applications again to the D. S. P. to take steps. Her statement has been recorded by the police on March 25, 1969, which is at page 49 of the record. In that statement she has clearly admitted that between January 11, 1969 and January 30, 1969, sometimes forcible possession of the wada has been taken and she was not allowed to enter or use the wada, i. e. , house Nos. 2 to 7. All these applications made one after another were ultimately considered and it appears that police, made pan-chanama dated March 29, 1969. A copy of the panchanama is at page 35. The recitals in the panchanama show that there were two locks to each door but three locks were recent and there was also one window by which a person could enter or come out of that house and there were three servants at the time of the panchanama inside the house and those three servants were of Sharadchandra, party No. 2. After knowing this position, the house was seized by the police by sealing it. Thereafter application has been made by the P. S. I. to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate to take steps as there was likelihood of breach of peace and the Sub-Divisional Magistrate decided to take proceedings under Section 145, Code of Criminal Procedure, and passed a preliminary order dated June 5, 1969.