SENARAM DAS Vs. KASHIRAM DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the judgment and order passed by the Session Judge, Nagaon on 13-12-94 in Criminal Motion No. 95(N)/94 allowing the revision filed by the opposite party(first party) and declaring possession in favour of the opposite party (first party) in a proceeding under S. 145, Cr. P.C.

(2.) At the instance of the opposite party the Sub-Division Magistrate, Nagaon initiated a proceeding under S. 144, Cr. P.C. on 22-2-94 in respect of a plot of land measuring 9 Bighas 2 Kathas 13 Lechas covered by periodic Patta No. 46 (old) 38 (new) in Dag No. 211 situated at Bajarchuk gaon. The opposite party also stated that the second party threatened him with dire consequence and there was likelihood of breach of peace and tranquillity over the disputed land. Thereafter the case came up before an Executive Magistrate for disposal. The Executive Magistrate registered the case as MR No. 60/94 under S. 145/446, Cr. P.C. and also passed an order under S. 146 attaching the disputed land as the Executive Magistrate considered the case to be one of emergency. After examination of the witnesses on behalf of the parties the Executive Magistrate declared possession in favour of the petitioners (second party). Being aggrieved the opposite party (first party) approached the Session Judge by filing a Criminal Revision (Criminal Motion No. 95(N) 94). The Sessions Judge after hearing the parties by his judgment and order dated 13-12-94 allowed the revision and set aside the order passed by the Executive Magistrate declaring possession in favour of the petitioners (second party). However, the Sessions Judge did not consider it fit to remand the case as in his opinion, the evidence on record clearly showed that the opposite party (first party) was forcibly and wrongfully dispossessed on 20-2-94. He appreciated the evidence recorded by the Executive Magistrate and declared possession in favour of the opposite party (first party). Hence the present petition.

(3.) I have heard Mr. D. N. Choudhury learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. G. P. Bhowmik, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party.