TRINATH MOHANTY Vs. LAKHAN NAPAK AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal revision is directed against an order of the learned Sessions Judge of Berhampur revising a final order under Section 145. Code of Criminal Procedure in exercise of his revisional jurisdiction.

(2.) PETITIONER and opposite party No. 1 figured as second party and first party respectively in the proceeding under Section 145. Code of Criminal Procedure. The case for the opposite party No. 1 was that the disputed lands belong to his private deity Ram -Lakshman -Sita and that he is in cultivating possession of the same as marfatdar of the deity. The Petitioner's case on the other hand was that he is the bhag tenant 'in respect of the disputed lands since the time of his father and that during the minority of opposite party No. 1, his mother had filed Title Suit No. 6 of 1965 wherein the Petitioner was declared to be the bhag tenant and the said decision was confirmed in appeal. It was also contended that in M. J. C. No. 181 of 1972 the mother (If opposite party No. 1 admitted, the Petitioner to be her tenant in respect of the disputed lands and that a proceeding under Section 36 -A of the Orissa Land Reforms Act is pending between the parties.

(3.) IT is urged on behalf of .the Petitioner that the order of the learned Magistrate keeping the subject -matter of dispute under the zima of the Revenue Inspector was an order under Section 145(8), Code of Criminal Procedure and not an order of attachment under Section 146(1), Code of Criminal Procedure. It is further urged that the opposite party No. 1 having remained absent on the date fixed for hearing the learned Magistrate had no other alternative but to pass the final order under Section 145, Code of Criminal Procedure on the strength of the materials available on the record.