KUMUD NATH CHAKRAVARTY Vs. AJOO PRAMANIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Rule was issued calling upon the District Magistrate to show cause why the order directing the prosecution of the petitioners under Section 188, Indian Penal Code, should not be set aside.

(2.) It appears that the petitioners are the Ijaradars under certain Zamindars, who had a hat at Lakhipur, and there is a rival hat at Pirgacha belonging to certain other Zamindars. On a Police report the Sub-Divisional Magistrate made an order on the 13th February 1920 forbidding the petitioners from holding any hat at Lakhipur on particular days, directing them to abstain from taking vendors and stall-keepers by force from Pirgacha hot to their own hat and not to take any other measure to the detriment of the old hat at Pirgacha. This order was made under Section 144, Criminal Procedure Code. Subsequently on the 9th April 1920 the Sub-Divisional Magistrate went to the locality and advised the officers of both parties to amicably settle the matter, but there was no amicable settlement, On the 15th April the Sub- Divisional Magistrate made the order which had been passed on the 13th February absolute.

(3.) We do not understand what the Magistrate meant by making the order absolute because an order under Section 144 ceased to have any effect on the expiry of two months. There was no order on the 15th April which could be made absolute, nor is there any provision in that section for making the order absolute.