PROM SINGH Vs. PARBATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners seek the quashing of the proceedings initiated by the SubDivisional Magistrate, Fatehgarh Sahib under section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the basis of a police report saying that there was apprehension of breach of peace on account of possession of a certain piece of land which initially belonged to Mehar Singh. Claim to this land has been made by Mst. Parbati, as a widow and the other party claims this land being collaterals of the deceased. It is not disputed before me that prior to the initiations of these proceedings on June 10, 1986, Mst. Parbati had already filed a civil suit for declaration and permanent injunction restraining the other side i.e. Prem Singh and another from interfering with her peaceful possession over the suit land. A temporary injunction to this effect was also granted by the court on July 17,1986 i.e. much earlier to the initiation of these proceedings as an interim measure. It is, however, urged by the learned counsel for the respondent that the said order of temporary injunction is-now a subject-matter of appeal before the Additional District Judge. Be that as it may, it makes no difference to the settled proposition that in such matters when the parties are already before the civil Court and the said Court bas also granted an injunction in favour of a particular party, the Magistrate cannot initiate or continue proceedings under section 145, Cr. P.C. with regard to the possession of the same very land. In Bhawan Pal v. Prem Kumar Jam and others, I have already ruled that in such situations the only course open to the Magistrate is to proceed under section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. I, therefore, allow this petition and quash the proceedings now pending before the Magistrate.

(2.) IN order to be fair to the learned counsel for the respondent, it may be mentioned here that at one stage he sought to argue that the present petition itself is not maintainable as the petitioner could well seek the relief against the order of attachment passed under section 146 of the Code of Criminal Procedure from a revisional Court. This submission of the learned counsel has been recorded only to be rejected for the simple reason that what is claimed in this petition is that the entire proceedings before the Magistrate are totally without jurisdiction and deserve to be quashed. The petitioner is not challenging any particular order of the Magistrate. Proceedings quashed.