NAND JEE SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition has been preferred by the petitioners against the impugned order dtd. 30/11/2018 passed by learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-VI, Siwan in Criminal Revision No. 44 of 2001, whereby learned Sessions Court has allowed the revision petition setting aside the impugned order dtd. 16/11/2000 passed by learned Executive Magistrate, Maharajganj in proceeding initiated under Sec. 145 Cr.PC in Trial No. 22 of 2000 and possession of first party Suba Ram over the disputed land is confirmed and the second party who are petitioners herein are directed not to interfere in the possession of the first party over the land in question.

(2.) The factual background of the case is that in view of report dtd. 15/10/1988 of Officer-in-charge of local Police Station, proceeding under Sec. 144 Cr.PC was initiated. As per the report, there was tension prevailing between two parties on account of land dispute. However, subsequently by the order dtd. 31/12/1988, the proceeding under Sec. 144 Cr.PC was closed and proceeding under Sec. 145 Cr.PC was initiated after hearing both the parties.

(3.) As per the preliminary order dtd. 31/12/1988, whereby the proceeding under Sec. 145 Cr.PC has been initiated, both the parties admit that khatiyani raiyat of the land in question is Jita Chamar. However, the first party Suba Ram claims that he is legal heir/successor of said Jita Chamar. He is also claiming that he is in possession of the property in question. As per his claim, some house are also built over some part of the land. However, as per second party, who are petitioners herein, they have got this land in execution of mortgage decree and they are also paying land revenue to the Government. Hence, learned S.D.M. found that there is dispute between the parties in regard to possession and it is not possible for him to decide who is in actual possession, hence, requiring enquiry under Sec. 145 Cr.PC.