KISHAN SAHAI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Proceedings under 8. 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were started by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Khetri on the application of Krishna son of Nanag Jat (hereinafter to be referred to as the opposite party). During the proceedings, property was attached. On the 17th November, 1951 learned Magistrate dropped the proceedings as in his opinion there was no longer any apprehension of the breach of peace. After the proceedings were dropped the opposite party presented an application that the land and the crop in dispute were in his possession and should be restored to him. The learned Magistrate accepted this application and directed the attached property to be handed over to the opposite party.

(2.) Against this order the applicants Kishan Sahai and Ghod had went in revision to the Court of Session at Jhunjhnu. The Additional Sessions Judge Jhunjhnu has made this reference recommending that the order of the sub-Divisional Magistrate Khetri dated the 9th January, 1951 regarding the delivery of possession of the property in dispute to the opposite party Kishna be set aside.

(3.) I have heard the Learned Counsel for the applicants in support of the reference. The learned Government Advocate concedes that after the proceedings under Section 145 were dropped the Learned Magistrate was functus officio and he was not authorised to make the order that the property should be delivered to the opposite party as it amounted to the decision regarding question of possession. The opposite party in spite of notice has not appeared.