NARAYAN DAS RAI Vs. BOLTA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are first party in a proceeding under Section 145. Code of Criminal Procedure, relating to forty-five bighas of land in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate at Hajipur, The land in dispute is diara land and emerged out of the water of the Ganga on the western side of the river. The petitioners belong to village Sabalpur Diara in the district of Patna.

(2.) According to the petitioners, the disputed land had accreted to the land of the petitioners lying in village Sabalpur. According to the case of the opposite party, however, the dispute land is part of their land in Muzaffarpur district, within police-station Raghopur. The petitioners claim the disputed land as part of plots Nos. 1965. 1966. 1967. 1976, 1977. 1978, 2017 and a portion of plot No. 1882 of village Sabalpur. police-station Malsalami, in the district of Patna. They laid claim to it under the Bengal Alluvion and Diluvion Regulation. 1825. According to the petitioners, the members of the second party claiming to be settles from the ex-landlord of Raghopur moved the officer-in-charge of Raghopur police-station, who without visitation the spot, assumed that the disputed land law within the district of Muzaffarpur, and submitted a report on the 12th January. 1967 Ajinexure A to the petition) on which the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Hajipur, took cognizance of the proceeding on the 21st January, 1967. When the petitioners appeared before the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, they objected to the territorial jurisdiction of the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate to start a proceeding as the river Ganga is the demarcating line between the districts of Patna and Muzaffarpur with reference to the notification in the Calcutta Gazette (Part I, at Page 441) Notification No. 1995-J, dated the 4th April. 1894. in which it is stated that the midstream of the river Ganga shall be the boundary between the districts of Darbhanga and Muzaffarpur, on one side, and the district of Patna, on the other, and the main stream of the river Gandak shall be the boundary between the districts of Muzaffarpur and Saran. Reference was also made to the Bihar Gazette (Extraordinary) dated the 17th July, 1953. showing that the northern boundary of Patna Municipal Corporation is the midstream of the river Ganga. The petitioners also claim that the demarcating line between the lands of Raghopur police-station, in the district of Muzaffarpur on one side and the lands appertaining to the district of Patna. on the other side, has been found as a fact by the judgment and order passed in the Patna High Court in Criminal Revn. No. 746 of 1963. by S.P. Singh. J. on the 12th November. 1963, and by the Judgment and order dated the 3rd October 1958. passed by Imam J., in Criminal Revn. No. 423 of 1958. Relying on these materials, objection was filed by the petitioners to the assumption of jurisdiction over the proceeding by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Hajipur, as also the Police Inspector of Raghopur police-station, whereas in fact, it should have been within police-station Malsalami and the proceeding should have been started in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate at Barh.

(3.) Shri P.K. Prasad. Magistrate, who was acting as Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Hajipur on the 10th of March, 1967, directed that he would hold local inspection on the 15th March, 1967, Shri Prasad. in pursuance of the order passed by him on the 10th March, 1967, visited village Sabalpur and on the 17th March, 1967, decided the preliminary point against the petitioners on the footing of the report dated the 15th March, 1967, holding that the channel of the river Ganga near village Sabalpur had completely dried up and that the main stream of the river was flowing at a distance of l miles, as he heard, towards the north of the disputed land and so the cadastral map of the village Rustampur was allowed to prevail, vide annexure B to the petition. It may be stated that the flow of the river to the east of the disputed land is from north to south. The petitioners have accordingly moved this Court for determination of the question as to which Court would have jurisdiction and in which district the land would be taken to lie, i.e., in the district of Patna or in the district of Muzaffarpur. This matter was referred by a learned single Judge to the Division Bench before whom the judgment of this Court . Ramgobind Singh v. Askrit Singh was cited in support of the proposition that the rule of midstream of the river Ganga would not be the test for ascertaining the criminal jurisdiction and that the jurisdiction of the police-station concerned would be the only criterion for exercising criminal jurisdiction with reference to Section 4 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.