BIHARILAL SHARMA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the order dated 11-1-90 passed by Sri T. Rajak, Executive Magistrate, Jamshedpur in Misc. Case No. 745/76 and the judgment dated 26-5-90 passed by Sri Tarkeshwar Prasad, 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Jamshdpur in Criminal Rev. No. 27/90 through which the order of the Executive Magistrate was confirmed.

(2.) The fact in short for the purpose of this application is that a 145, Cr. P. C. proceeding was initiated in the year 1976 in respect of plot Nos. 1104 and 1165 under khata No. 406 of Mouza Maludbani P.S. Barsudih and vide order dated 5-7-87 the possession of the petitioner over the land in dispute was declared by the Executive Magistrate, in that proceeding, under Section 145, Cr. P. C. Against that order opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 preferred a revision bearing Criminal Revision No. 90-C/122 of 1987-88 which was allowed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Jamshedpur and the order of the lower court was set aside and the case was again remanded back to the learned Executive Magistrate for fresh decision. Ultimately on 23-9-89, the order was passed in terms of the order of the appellate court by the learned Executive Magistrate are same and vide order dated 23-9-89 the possession over the disputed land was declared in favour of opposite party Nos. 2 and 3, namely, Ramnath Prasad Sharma and Daroga Pd. Sharma. The petitioner again preferred a revision bearing No. 220/89, but unfortunately that too was dismissed. In the meantime, opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 in whose favour the court below passed the order in a proceeding under Section 145, Cr. P. C., filed an application before the court below that they were dispossessed from the land in suit and as such the learned Executive Magistrate wide order dated 11-9-90 without hearing the petitioner passed an order for restoration of possession of the disputed land in favour of these opposite parties and Officer-in-charge was directed to restore the possession of the same. Against that order, the petitioner preferred revision bearing No. 27/90 and Criminal Revision No. 220/89 and both the revision were disposed of by common order dated 20-5-90 by 2nd Additional Sessions Judge and both the revisions were dismissed. disputed land as provided under sub-clauses (4) of Section 145, Ct. P. C, he will pass order for restoration of the pot-session of the disputed land in favour of opposite party Nos. 2 and ? according to law. With this observation, this application is allowed.