SATKARTAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SATKARTAR Singh and Harpinder Singh, petitioners have come to this court in this criminal miscellaneous under Section 482, Cr.PC for quashing of the orders dated 27.5.91, passed by Sh. S.S. Puri, SDM, Batala, respondent -2, Annexure P1 and order dated 28.6.91, passed by Sh. Gurmel Singh, Executive Magistrate, Batala, respondent -3, Annexure P2 and order dated 25.7.1991 passed by Sh. S.S. Puri, SDM, Annexure P9.

(2.) THE SDM, acting on a Police report, found that there was a dispute regarding possession of land, measuring 187 Kanals 9 Marla and 189 Kanals, situated in village Talwandi Lal Singh, Tehsil Batala, between the petitioners arrayed as second -party and Smt. Daljit Kaur etc., respondents as the first - party. He, thus, issued orders under Section 145 (1), Cr.PC and directed the parties to put in their written statements and their respective claims. Vide Annexure P2, the Executive Magistrate, considering it to be a case of emergency, attached the lands and appointed SHO, Sadar Batala as the Receiver of the land (this order was passed by the Executive Magistrate, as the SDM was on leave). On 25.7.91, the SDM passed order directing attachment of the land and again appointed the SHO as the Receiver.

(3.) THE petitioners have given the history of the dispute and according to their claim, petitioner -1 was in possession of the land, measuring 126 Kanals and 15 Marlas; while Harpinder Singh petitioner -2 was in possession of land measuring 76 Kanals and 1 Marla and 187 Kanals and 8 Marlas. Bhupinder Singh, along with his mother Smt. Daljit Kaur and his three sons, namely Gurinder Singh, Jatinder Singh and Harinder Singh asserted their claim to this land, alleging that they had purchased the title and interest therein from the persons who were claiming to be the rightful owners. They even threatened to interfere with the possession of the petitioners and consequently, the petitioners filed 3 civil suits against the aforesaid persons in the year 1987. In one of those suits, filed by petitioner -2, some other persons, besides Bhupinder Singh and others, were also included as defendants. The trial Court issued an ad interim temporary injunction, but vacated the same on 22.2.90 and in appeal, the learned Addl, District Judge gave a direction to the parties to maintain status quo. One of the appeals is, however, still pending and an order of status quo has been passed by that Court. It was on 23.5.91 that SHO Ajaib Singh prepared a complaint under Section 145, Cr.PC and submitted the same to the SDM. It is on that basis that order Annexure P1 was passed. The petitioners challenge these orders inter alia on the ground that the matter regarding possession of the land was sub judice between the parties in a Civil Court and there were specific orders calling upon the parties to maintain status quo and as such, no proceedings under Section 145/146, Cr.PC could be initiated. The order so passed tantamounts to interference in the orders of the Civil Court. If there was any apprehension of breach of peace, the proper remedy was to porceed under Section 107, Cr.PC.