PRITTAMDAS CHELA BABA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the instant criminal revision under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, "the Code" hereinafter), the petitioners have challenged the order dated 21-12-2002 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Raisinghnagar, district Sri Ganganagar (for short, "the Revisional Court" hereinafter) in Criminal Revision No. 6/2002, whereby the Revisional Court, on a revision petition filed by non-petitioner No.2, while allowing the revision petition, set-aside the order dated 1-2-2002 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Raisinghnagar and remanded the matter to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Raisinghnagar under Section 145 (4) of the Code to record the evidence of the parties and decide as to which of the parties was in possession of the disputed property within two months just before the date on which the preliminary order was passed and thereafter to pass an appropriate order under subsection (6) of Section 145 of the Code. Aggrieved by the order impugned, the petitioners have filed the instant criminal revision petition.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Carefully gone through the order impugned as also records of both the courts below.

(3.) Briefly stated, the facts of the case, to the extent they are relevant and necessary for decision of this revision petition are that a complaint was filed by the Station House Officer, Police Station, Ramsinghpur, district Sri Ganganagar against party No. 1 Suraj Munni Chela Baba Labh Das, the nonpetitioner No.2 herein, and party No.2 Akas Munni Chela Baba Labh Das, petitioner No.2 herein, alleging therein that in respect of the land of Chak No.43-GB, Muraba No.42 measuring 9 Bigha, Muraba No.46 measuring 6 Bighas and 15 Biswas; Chak 7-AS Muraba No.198/453 measuring 15 Bigha and 14 Biswas,; Chak No. 42-GB, Muraba No. 53 measuring 13 Bigha and 10 Biswas; Chak 43-GB, Muraba Nos. 42 measuring 4 Bighas, Muraba No.46 (new No.48-A) measuring 6 Bigha and 5 Biswas, totalling 57 Bighas of land, there is a dispute between the parties relating to possession of the property, which is likely to result in breach of peace. On the said complaint, on 28-6-1996, the Sub- Divisional Magistrate, Raisinghnagar drew preliminary order under Section 145 of the Code, attached the land in dispute and appointed the Tehsildar, Sri Vijaynagar as the Receiver. The order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Raisinghnagar came to be challenged before the Revisional Court and the order of the Revisional Court has been challenged before this Court. Various rounds of litigation have taken place including the revision before the Additional Sessions Judge, Raisinghnagar. The appointment of the Receiver came to be set aside by the Additional Sessions Judge, Raisinghnagar vide order dated 8-11-1996. By the order dated 19-12-1996, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Raisinghnagar directed to deliver the possession of the property in dispute to the party, from whom the possession was taken. Non-petitioner No.2 Suraj Munni filed a revision petition against that order before the Additional Sessions Judge, Raisinghnagar, which came to be dismissed on 20-1-1997. On a transfer petition filed by the non-petitioner, the matter was transferred by the order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Raisinghnagar to the Court of the Additional Collector (Adm.), Sri Ganganagar. It appears that the Additional Collector (Adm.), Sri Ganganagar recorded the evidence of the parties. The Additional Collector (Adm.), Sri Ganganagar could not arrive at a conclusion as to which of the parties was in possession on the date of the order or just before two months prior to the date of passing the preliminary order and, therefore, directed the parties to approach a competent civil court to get their rights decided. It appears that instead of getting the rights decided by the parties from the civil court, an inquiry was carried out under Section 18 of the Rajasthan Public Trusts Act, 1959 by the Assistant Commissioner, Devasthan Department, Bikaner. The statement filed by the petitioners was found to be correct and the statement filed by the non-petitioner was not accepted. A revision petition filed by the non-petitioner against the inquiry report also failed. The order of the Additional Collector (Adm.), Sri Ganganagar directing the parties for obtaining declaration of rights from the competent civil court was challenged before the Revisional Court, which came to be dismissed, against which petitioner Pritam Das filed a miscellaneous petition under Section 482 of the Code, being S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.669/2000 and by the order dated 22- 3-2001, the said miscellaneous petition also came to be dismissed.