GHISA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a reference by the learned Additional District Magistrate, Sikar, Mr. Manohar Singh, dated 25th June, 1958.

(2.) ON 2nd July, 1956, Jaisa S/o Balu, resident of Jugalpura, applied to the S. D. M. , Neem-ka-Thana, that he was in possession of the land under Kothi Sanwat Singh in Jugalpura for a long time, and the Parcha Chakbandi and Gasht Girdawari were in the name of his father, but that the respondents Sabal Singh, Ramdan Singh, Bhura Singh, Bane Singh, Bisan Singh, Mangej Singh and Gul Singh Rajputs, and Ghisa and Narain Ahirs were bent upon ejecting him, and there was apprehension of breach of the peace. ON the 3rd of July, 1956, Ghisa and Narain also made an application that Jaisa, Balu and 12 other persons of Jugalpura were bent upon dispossessing Ghisa and Narain from half of the land under Kothi Sanwat Singhwali, of which Ghsia and Narain were in peaceful possession for some time. Ghisa relied on the Gasht Girdawai of Rabi 2012. The learned Magistrate passed a preliminary order under sec. 145 Cr. P. C. on 12th July, 1956, and made enquiries as required by law, but was of the opinion that he was unable to decide as to which of the parties was in possession, and he attached the land in dispute, and drew up a statement of facts of the case, and forwarded the record of the proceedings to the Assistant Collector-cum-Magistrate, First Glass, Neem-ka-Thana, for decision under sec. 146 of the Code. The learned Assistant Collector took evidence, and declared Jaisa and his party to be in possession of Khasra Nos. 765, 766, 768 and 769 of Kothi Sanwat Singhwali on the date of the preliminary order. He returned the record to the learned S. D. M. for necessary action according to law. Ghisa filed a revision to the Court of the District Magistrate. The learned Additional District Magistrate, who dealt with the case, has recommended that the order of the Assistant Collector, Neem-ka-Thana, be quashed on the following grounds : - (1) The court contemplated under sec. 146 Cr. P. C. , to which statement of the case is to be forwarded is a civil court of competent jurisdiction, and not a revenue court to which the case was forwarded in the present case. (3) The learned Assistant Collector purported to act as Magistrate inasmuch as the seal fixed under his signatures on the order is of the Magistrate, First Class, and he has been so described in the order.