MAHESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJ. & ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Misc. petition under Sec. 482 Crimial P.C. has been filed against the order dated 16.1.2006 passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Chirawa whereby the Sub Divisional Magistrate has appointed the receiver over the disputed property under Sec. 146 sub-clause (1) Crimial P.C., and revision against the said order, has also been dismissed.

(2.) The short facts of the case relevant for disposal of the petition are that Executive Officer of Pilani Municipal Board filed a complaint under Sec. 145 Crimial P.C. to S.H.O., Pilani on 9.4.2003 against the petitioner as well as party No.2, respondent No.2. In the complaint, it was not alleged that there is danger of breach of peace between the petitioner and the other party. The proceedings were initiated on the said complaint. On 16.1.2006 abruptly, the court below has appointed the receiver on the disputed property without recording any finding that it is the case of emergency and the contention of the present petitioner is that the impugned order is per verse and illegal and be quashed. The other contention of the present petitioner is that Pilani Charitable Trust has filed a civil suit for permanent injunction on the ground that trust is the owner and in possession of the property. In the written statement, the petitioner submitted that the disputed property is in actual possession of the petitioner. A stay order was granted which was amended in the appeal and after considering the possession of the present petitioner, order of status quo has been issued. The contention of the present petitioner is that when civil proceedings were pending between the parties, the stay was operative, there was no reason for the SDM to appoint a receiver and that too when no emergency was existed. Per contra, the contention of the Public Prosecutor is that there is no infirmity in the impugned order. None is present for respondent No.2.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor and perused the impugned order as well as the documents produced by the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor.