LAWS(J&K)-1978-9-7

SAJJA Vs. HABIB RATHER

Decided On September 26, 1978
Sajja Appellant
V/S
Habib Rather Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two revision petitions arise out of the proceedings initiated under section 145 Cr. P. C. in the court of the SDM Anantnag. A common question of law is involved in both the petitions. Therefore, this single judgment will dispose both of them.

(2.) IT appears that along with an application under section 145 Cr. P. C. an interim application was moved before the SDM for making an order of attachment of the subject matter of dispute as it was alleged that there was imminent danger of breach of peace on the spot which necessitated the initiation of an action under sec. 145(4) Cr. P. C. In both the cases the SDM after drawing up the preliminary order proceeded to attach the subject matter of the dispute in terms of section 145(4) Cr. P. C. Aggrieved by the said order of the SDM, the respondents in the petitions moved the Sessions Judge in revision. The learned Sessions Judge while admitting the revision petitions suspended the operation of the impugned orders, pending disposal of the revision petitions. It is against this order of suspension of the Sessions Judge, that the petitioners have moved this court in revision.

(3.) MR . Hagroo learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the Sessions Judge has without applying his mind to the facts of the case suspended the operation of the attachment order, although it was made known to him that the order of attachment had already been executed and the property had vested in the Supardars who had taken the charge of the same. According to the argument of the learned counsel the unqualified and the un -conditional order of suspension has resulted in signalling the respondents herein to decide the question of possession of land in dispute by force and physical strength. The order has set at naught the very purpose for which Section 145(4) has been engrafted in the Code. As the order had been executed, the Sessions Judge, could not suspend its operation and allow the other side to change status quo in respect of the possession of the subject matter of dispute.