JAGAT CH PAUL Vs. DHIRENDRA CHANDRA PAUL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE learned Sessions Judge, Agartala Shri P.R. Das Gupta forwarded the records of his Court's Criminal motion No. 84 of 1951 to this Court under Section 438, Criminal Procedure Code, with no definite recommendation but it appears from his order dated 28 -9 -51 that he has come to the conclusion that the order in question passed by the Magistrate is illegal and wants it to be quashed. The learned Sessions Judge ought to have forwarded this reference on a prescribed form and in a proper manner.

(2.) A point raised by the learned Counsel for the Opposite party who has appeared in this reference is that the aggrieved party ought to have recourse under sub sections (4) of Section 144, Criminal Procedure Code, and not by way of revision. That could be done but if he has not availed himself of the remedy provided by sub sections (4) above, it is no ground for refusing to interfere in revision.

(3.) ON a petition under Section 144, Criminal Procedure Code the learned Magistrate went to the spot and made local inspection and enquiry. He found the opposite party to have encroached upon a portion of the land inside the homestead of the petitioner. On that portion the other party was erecting a wall in contravention to the agreement already reached between them. The Magistrate apprehended breach of the peace and disturbance. In view of that he ordered to remove the structure of the wall immediately. The order under Section 144, Criminal Procedure Code was to remain in force.