RAM KRISHAN DASS Vs. RAMESHWAR DASS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE bone of contention between the parties is a parcel of agricultural land belonging to a religious institution. THE rival parties are claimants to the Mohatmimship of the Dera to which the land is attached. THEre was civil litigation between the parties. At one point of time, deciding the question of temporary injunction, the Civil Court passed an order of maintenance of status quo as conceded to by the counsel for both parties. That order was passed on 10-4-1985. Beforehand on 1-3-1985, the police reported to the Sub Divisional Magistrate the existence of a dispute regarding possession leading to breach of peace and recommended initiation of proceedings under S.145 of Cri. P.C. THE learned Magistrate took cognizance thereof. Later on 1-5-1985, on motion for the purpose, he passed a composite order under Ss.145 and 146 of Cri.P.C. ordering attachment of the land in dispute and appointing a receiver thereof. THE petitioner aggrieved against that order filed a revision petition before the Court of Session which was dismissed and this has given rise to the present petition under S.482 of Cri.P.C.

(2.) AS is plain from the facts afore-narrated, parties through their counsel had willingly agreed to maintain status quo regarding possession and on the basis of that consensus, the civil court passed the order. Now it was the duty of the executive Courts to maintain that order and not cause disruption thereof by letting the receiver assume possession causing dispossession of the party/parties whomsoever was/were in possession of the land in dispute. Nonetheless, it cannot be said that the Executive Court could not initiate proceedings under S.145 of Cr.P.C. but on the peculiar circumstances of the case, attachment of the property was impermissible, in the face of the consensual Civil Court order. If there was any apprehension of breach of peace, resort could be had to the provisions of S.107 of Cr.P.C. In the scheme of things, courts act in mutual respect of each other's orders. No element of overbearance is permissible in our system. Thus, I am of the considered view that the orders under S.146 of Cri.P.C. were wholly uncalled for and those are thus quashed keeping alive proceedings under S.145 of the aforesaid Code. Ordered accordingly. Order accordingly.