RAJESH SHARMA Vs. SHASHI JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant has challenged the order dated 4.10.2010 passed by the learned SDM, Mandla in criminal case No.161 (B.121) 06-07, whereby the order dated 22.6.2006 passed by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Mandla in criminal revision No.95/2003 was complied and the encroachment of the applicant was removed from the spot.

(2.) The prosecution's case in short, is that, in the year 1981 the applicant's mother sold a piece of land having area 5,700 sq. feet to the respondent and the possession was also given. Thereafter, the mother of the applicant and the applicant sold the adjacent land to other persons. The respondent has moved an application under section 145 of the Cr.P.C. before the SDM and vide order dated 30.6.2003, the learned SDM directed that the applicant and his mother encroached the land which was in the possession of the respondent and constructed a boundary wall and therefore, that boundary wall may be removed and it was directed that the respondent be not dispossessed from her land. In criminal revision No.95/2003, the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Mandla vide order dated 22.6.2006, confirmed the order passed by the SDM and also directed that order will be effective to the area of 5,700 sq. feet. Thereafter, the respondent filed an application for execution of the order dated 30.6.2003. The SDM directed for measurement of the disputed land but, after considering the objection raised by the respondent on various reports of Revenue Inspectors, a team of revenue officers was constituted as directed by the Collector and thereafter, the team found that the applicant encroached the land of the respondent and therefore, the SDM passed the impugned order in execution of the order dated 22.6.2006 passed by the revisionary Court.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.