TARLOK SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Prayer in this petition is for quashing of the proceedings initiated by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Jalalabad, under Sections 145 and 146 of the Cr.P.C., as also for setting aside the order dated 29.9.2004, whereby a receiver has been appointed.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner contends that a civil suit, namely; Tarlok Singh V. Manohar Lal is pending before Additional Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalalabad, wherein the petitioner has prayed for the grant of a decree for specific performance of an agreement to sell dated 17.3.2004. It is contended that in view of the pendency of a civil suit, all questions relating to the disputed land would be determined by the civil Court. The Sub Divisional Magistrate has no jurisdiction to initiate proceedings under Sections 145/146 of the Cr.P.C. and order attachment of the property in dispute. Reliance for the above proposition is placed upon various judgements reported as Mahar Jahan and others V. State of Delhi and others (2006) 1 SCC (Crl.)320, Ram Sumer Puri Mahant V. State of U.P. and others, AIR 1985 SC 472, Nirpal Singh V. S.D.M., Ram Pura Phul, 2001(3) RCR (Criminal) 107, Lord Shiva Charitable Trust V. State of Haryana 1999(1) RCR (Criminal) 706. It is further contended that in view of the pendency of a civil suit, the jurisdiction of the Magistrate, to exercise powers under Sections 145/146 of the Cr.P.C., stood ousted.

(3.) Counsel for the State of Punjab as also counsel for the private respondent state that the mere pendency of a civil suit does not oust the jurisdiction of the Executive Magistrate to initiate proceedings under Sections 145/146 of the Cr.P.C., the object whereof is to maintain peace and order. Reliance for the above proposition is placed upon Jagdish V. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Panipat and others, 1987 Crl.Law Journal, 1198. During the course of arguments, counsel for the respondent has pointed out that proceedings before the Magistrate are at an advanced stage. The evidence has concluded and the case is now fixed for arguments.