MOHD SHAFI DAR Vs. RASOOL OAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned Sessions Judge Pulwama has made a reference in Criminal Revision No. 22/1982 pending before him for quashing of order passed by the District Magistrate Pulwama in proceedings under S. 145 Cr. P.C. It appears that the petitioner had filed an application under S. 145 Cr. P.C. before District Magistrate Pulwama for initiation of proceedings under the said section against the respondents. On 15-10-1982 the application was decided by the District Magistrate holding that the respondents were in possession and the petitioner should be restrained from interfering in their possession. This order was assailed before the Sessions Judge by the petitioner.

(2.) From the perusal of this order it appears that on 13-10-1982 when the District Magistrate Pulwama was seized of the matter, he had gone on spot and had recorded the statement of eleven witnesses. These eleven witnesses appear to have been produced by the non-applicants, respondentss before him. From the record it does not appear as to whether the petitioner was present on spot or not. The witnesses whose statements were recorded had definitely deposed against the petitioner and on the basis of their statements as also on the basis of revenue record, the District Magistrate seems to have passed the impugned order. The District Magistrate has not mentioned anything about the consideration of affidavits. It appears that the District Magistrate has not at all considered the affidavits. His judgment is based on the testimony of the witnesses whose statements were recorded by him on 13-10-1982 on spot. The learned Sessions Judge has viewed the procedure to decide the case on the basis of the testimony of witnesses on spot as bad and has held that the order dt.15-10-1982 is vitiated.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length.