MANJULA DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application filed on behalf of the petitioner, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is to quash the order the order dated 18.9.2003 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Saharsa, in Miscellaneous Case No.439 of 1989, declaring the possession of the first party/opposite party nos.2 and 3 with respect to the land in dispute in a proceeding under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and also the order dated 2.11.2006 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.II, Saharsa, dismissing the Criminal Revision No.353 of 2003 as preferred by the member of the second party/petitioner against the aforesaid order dated 18.9.2003.

(2.) THE brief fact, leading to this application, is that on the basis of the report submitted by the Officer Incharge of Sourbazar Police Station, the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Saharsa, initiated a proceeding under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in which the opposite party nos.2 and 3 were the members of the first party and the petitioner was member of second party, through Miscellaneous Case No.439 of 1989 with respect to the land in dispute. After filing of the show cause by the parties, the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Saharsa, converted the proceeding under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure into a proceeding under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and directed both the parties to file their written statement. After filing of the written statement and adducing the evidence by both the parties, the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Saharsa, passed the order on 18.9.2003, declaring the possession of the members of the first party/opposite party nos.2 and 3 until the order passed by the competent court, restraining the member of the second party/petitioner not to interfere in the possession of the members of the first party/opposite party nos.2 and 3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid order dated 18.9.2003 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Saharsa, the member of the second party/petitioner preferred Criminal Revision No.353 of 2003, which was dismissed, after hearing the parties, by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.II, Saharsa, vide order dated 2.11.2006.

(3.) ON the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite party nos.2 and 3 made submission that, in fact, the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.II, Saharsa, has discussed the order of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Saharsa, in detail in his order dated 2.11.2006 and has rightly dismissed the Criminal Revision as preferred by the member of the second party/petitioner against the order dated 18.9.2003 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Saharsa, declaring the possession of members of first party/opposite party nos.2 and 3. It has also been submitted that, in fact, the land in dispute was purchased by Uma Kant Malakar through sale deed dated