MOHAMMAD AMEER Vs. SBANKARAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision case is directed against the order passed by the Sessions Judge, Kareemnagar in Criminal Revision petition NJ. 5/76 reversing the order passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Sircilla in M C. No. 4/73.

(2.) There is a dispute regarding the possession in Survey No. 695 of Sircilla town measuring 10 guntas between Rudra Shankaraiah and five others, who are respondents herein and who will hereinafter be referred to as first party, and Mohd. Ameer and seven others who are the petitioners herein and who will also hereinafter be referred to as second party.

(3.) On 18-6-1972, the second party along with several Muslims went to S. No. 695 and errected barricade with stones as they claim it to be the Muslim grave yard. The first party along with 4 to 5 hundred Hindus went to S. No. 695 to resist the second party. When both parties wire about to clash with each other, the police rushed to the scene and adverted the clash and breach of peace. As there is every likelihood of imminent breach of peace and tranquility on account of the dispute regarding the possession in respect of the said land, the police filed a report before the Sub-divisional Magistrate with a request that proceedings may be taken under Section 145 Cr. P C. and that the land in S. No. 695 may be in the custody of the Court by attaching the laid land. The Sub Divisional Magistrate, Jagtial having been satisfied that there ha dispute as to possession of the land in S. No. 695 add that there is likelihood of breach of peace in Sircilla town on account of the dispute, took it on file and attached the land and took, into the custody of the court and issued notices to both parties for filing their statements. Both parties filed their statements. After perusing the report of the Sub-Inspector of Police and also the written statements filed by the First party as well as the second party respondents, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jagtial has submitted the case records to the District and Sessions Judge, Kareemnagar for transmission to the concerned Munsif Magistrate, for disposal. The District and Sessions Judge, Kareemnagar, in his turn, transferred the case records to the Judicial First Class Magistrate. Sircilla on 2-2-1973 directing him to dispose of the matter according to law. The learned Magistrate issued notices to both parties and directed them to file additional written statements, if they wanted to file. Both parties filed additional written statements. He conducted the enquiry. In the enquiry, the first party did not examine any witnesses, but filed documents Exs. P-1 to P-49 which include some affidavits. The second party examined one T. Yadayya (Revenue Inspector, SircilU) and filed documents Exs. D 1 to D-11. The learned Magistrate after taking into consideration the affidavits, sale deeds and other documents filed on both sides cane to the conclusion that the second party has clearly proved its possession at the time of passing of the preliminary order on 24-6-1972 and passed orders to that effect.