PRATAP SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition under Section 482 Cr. P. C. has been filed by the petitioner (party No. 2) with a prayer that the order dated 16. 2. 2004 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate, Jaitaran by which on a complaint filed by the SHO, Police station Sendra against the respondent No. 1 to 5 (Party No. 1) and the petitioner (Party No. 2) under Section 145 and 146 Cr. P. C. , the SDO, Jaitaran exercising powers under Section 146 (1) Cr. P. C. appointed SHO, Police Station Sendra as receiver in respect of land bearing Araji No. 1009/281, 1010/281 and 1012/281 situated in village Ravniya and further ordered SHO, Police Station Sendra to take possession of Araji No. 1009/281, 1010/281, 1011/281 and 1012/281 and submit the report, be quashed and set aside.

(2.) IT arises in the following circumstances: i) That party No. 1 (respondent No. 2 to 5) filed a complaint against party No. 2 (petitioner) before the SDO, Jaitaran under Section 145 and 146 Cr. P. C. on 21. 10. 2003 stating that they were in possession of land measuring 10 bighas each situated in Khasra No. 1009/281, 1010/281, 1011/281 and 1012/281 since 1976 and the petitioner (party No. 2) was claiming the said land as adopted son of Jasketan Singh but in fact, he was not the adopted son of Jasketan Singh and the petitioner (party No. 2) was trying forcibly to take possession of their land and therefore, there was apprehension of breach of peace on account of dispute and hence, a prayer was made that the land in question be attached. ii) That the above complaint was sent to the SHO, Police Station, Sendra by the SDO, Jaitaran on 21. 10. 2003 with a direction that the matter be examined and the report be submitted and thereafter the SHO, Police Station Sendra after taking into consideration the various statement recorded during the investigation, submitted a complaint under Section 145 and 146 Cr. P. C. against party No. 1 and 2 on 30. 1. 2004 in the court of SDO, Jaitaran admitting that there was serious dispute between party No. 1 (respondents No. 2 to 5) and party No. 2 (petitioner) over the disputed land and thus, there was apprehension of breach of peace between the parties and thus a prayer was made that receiver be appointed in respect of disputed land. iii) The said complaint of the SHO, Police Station Sendra was registered in the court of SDO, Jaitaran on 3. 2. 2004 and after drawing preliminary order, show cause notices were issued to both the parties i. e. party No. 1 and 2 as to why over the disputed land, the receiver be not appointed and the next date fixed was 23. 2. 2004. iv) IT has further been alleged by party No. 2 (petitioner) that subsequently dated was changed from 23. 2. 2004 to 13. 2. 2004. In the order-sheet of 13. 2. 2004, there is clear mention of the fact that the counsel for the parties sought time for submitting reply and the case was fixed for 16. 2. 2004 and the report of Tehsildar, Raipur was also sought. v) On 16. 2. 2004 the impugned order was passed by the learned SDO exercising the powers under Section 146 (1) Cr. P. C. in which presence of counsel for both the parties have been shown and the learned SDO, Jaitaran appointed SHO, Police Station Sendra as receiver in respect of land bearing Araji No. 1009/281, 1010/281, 1011/281 and 1012/281 and submit the report. vi) Aggrieved from the order dated 16. 2. 2004, the present misc. petition has been preferred by the petitioner (party No. 2) directly before this Court.

(3.) THERE is no dispute on the point that on the complaint dated 21. 10. 2003 of party No. 1 (respondents No. 2 to 5), SHO, Police Station, Sendra filed a complaint under Section 145 and 146 Cr. P. C. against the party No. 1 and 2 stating that there is serious dispute between party No. 1 and 2 over the disputed land and there is apprehension of breach of peace and hence the disputed land be attached and the receiver be appointed.