BANSHI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A reference was submitted by learned Sessions Judge, Jaipur District, Jaipur, recommending that the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate. Amber, dated January 13, 1966, declaring party No. 1's possession over the disputed property, i. e. , the temple, situate in village Shakarpura, in proceedings under Section 145, Criminal P. C. , be set aside, The brief facts pertaining to the reference are as follows:-

(2.) PARTY No. 1, Badri Prasad submitted an application to the Superintendent of Police, Jaipur, on May 20. 1965, to the effect that he was the Pujari (priest) of the temple of Shri Sitaramji of the village Shakarpura. Party No. 2, comprising Banshi and Jagdish, wanted to unlawfully dispossess him from the said temple and that on that account there was every apprehension of breach of the peace. Party No. 1, therefore prayed that proceedings under Section 145, Criminal P. C. be initiated to prevent breach of the peace. That application was forwarded by the Superintendent of Police to the Station House Officer, Jamwa Ramgarh. The police proved into the matter, made necessary inquiry and then submitted a report the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Amber stating that party No. 1 and party No. 2 were at loggerheads and were bent upon committing breach of the peace necessitating initiation of proceedings under Section 145, Criminal P. C. On receipt of the above report learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Amber, passed a preliminary order, on July 22, 1965, attaching the property i. e. , the temple, and appointed the Tehsildar Jamwa Ramgarh, as its receiver. The parties were further directed to file their written statements, affidavits and relevant documents in support of their respective claims. The parties did so. Eventually the Sub-Divisional Magistrate gave his finding that party No. 1 was in the actual possession of the temple property, within two months next before the date of the passing of the preliminary order and declared its possession.

(3.) PARTY No. 2, Banshi and Jagdish feeling aggrieved against the above order, filed a revision application in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Jaipur District. The said Judge perused the record, heard the arguments of both the parties and expressed his view that the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Amber went wrong in holding that party No. 1 was in actual possession of the temple property within two months next prior to the passing of the preliminary order, dated July 22, 1965, and therefore, his order required interference. He accordingly submitted a reference to this Court, with the recommendation that the order of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Amber dated January 13, 1966, be quashed. The reference was put up in chambers for orders on March 20, 1968; for some reasons or other it could not be disposed of that day. It was again put up in chambers for orders on April 1, 1968. This Court perused the entire record and rejected the reference.