BABULAL Vs. MAJBOOT SINGH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. against the order dated 16.12.2009 passed by III Additional Sessions Judge, Bhind (M.P.) in Criminal Revision No.197/2009, whereby the order dated 09.10.2009, passed by the SDM, Pargana, Mehgoan, in Case No.9/08X145 has been set aside.

(2.) The brief facts of the petition are that petitioner and respondents No.1 & 2 are the members of one family and possessing agricultural land bearing survey Nos. 299, 301, 302, 451, 454, 494, 497 & 848 situated at Village Kanathar, Tahsil Mehgoan. The owner of the aforesaid land was Kanhai who had gifted the aforesaid land in favour of Mandir Ramjanki for Pooja and maintenance and respondent No.1 was appointed as a Manager. Thereafter, in the year 1984, partition took place between the petitioner and respondent No.2 and they started living separately. The agricultural land, which has been gifted to Idol of temple Ramjanki, was also partitioned and both the petitioner and respondent No.1 got 1/2 share each. The petitioner and respondent No.1 started cultivating the said field, however on 23.05.2008, respondent No.1 preferred an application under Section 145 of Cr.P.C with a prayer that the possession of the entire land be given to him. The learned SDM, after considering the reply and the report of police, on 08.09.2008 has passed an order holding that the disputed land be handed over to some independent person. In compliance of the order of the learned SDM, the possession of the said land was handed over to one Amritlal Tyagi. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned SDM, respondent No.1 preferred a Criminal Revision before the Special Judge, Bhind, who stayed the order passed by the SDM, against which M.Cr.C. No.656/2009 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C was preferred before this Court and vide order dated 28.10.2009 this Court directed the parties to maintain status-quo. Thereafter, the learned Special Judge, Bhind, remanded the matter to the SDM with a direction to pass the order on merits. Thereafter, respondent No.1 preferred an application before the SDM stating therein that compromise has been arrived at between the parties in Panchayat, therefore, his application under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. may be dismissed. Learned SDM dismissed the application under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. vide order dated 29.06.2009, however, the petitioner has filed an application before the SDM praying that after disposal of the application under Section 145 of Cr.P.C, now, Supurdgi of the land in favour of Amritlal is no more required. It was prayed that the possession be handed over to the parties as it was prior to filing of the application under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. However, the learned SDM has disallowed the prayer by holding that respondent No.1/Manager has no right to remain in possession of the land, which was held by Idol of Ramjanki temple. The respondent No.1 has preferred revision before the IIIrd ASJ, Bhind challenging the order of SDM. The learned Additional Sessions Judge set aside the order dated 9.10.09 whereby interim Supurdgi was directed to be continued. Being aggrieved with the same, this petition has been filed.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order passed by the learned IIIrd ASJ, Bhind is illegal and is liable to be set aside. The learned SDM has disposed of the matter and continued the order by which the disputed land was given to Supurdgidar. The learned IIIrd ASJ, Bhind has committed illegality in setting aside the order passed by the learned SDM. The respondent No.1 has filed an application under Section 145 of Cr.P.C., which has to be disposed of either on the basis of the police report and the possession has to be given to Supurdigar or after disposal of the application the possession should be given to both the parties. The learned IIIrd ASJ has not considered this aspect and has committed an illegality. It is further submitted that without deciding the dispute regarding the possession, possibility of dispute between the parties will remain continue, therefore, the disputed land should remain to be attached or should be given in possession of the parties as earlier. It is prayed that the order passed by the learned IIIrd ASJ be set aside and the order passed by the learned SDM be affirmed.