Crl.Rev. No.2420 of 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Rev. No.2420 of 2008. Decided on: April 27, 2010. Madan Lal .. Petitioner VERSUS Biru and others .. Respondents * * * CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI * * * PRESENT Mr.Y.P.Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) Vide order dated 01.07.2008, the Sub Divisional Magistrate, exercising the powers under Section 145 Cr.P.C., on an application filed by the petitioner passed an order regarding the land in dispute to the effect that the petitioner is owner of the land in dispute but the respondents could not produce any evidence about the ownership, therefore, there was no requirement of proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C., pertaining to the land. He held that the respondents are in illegal possession of the land. Therefore, keeping in view the said fact Tehsildar Bhiwani was directed that he should get released the illegal possession with the police help and deliver it . . . 1 Crl.Rev. No.2420 of 2008 to the petitioner. Aggrieved by the said order, a revision petition was filed by the respondents. The revisional Court while examining the legality and propriety of the order set aside the same holding that the order passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate is beyond jurisdiction. I have gone through the order passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Bhiwani. The said Sub Divisional Magistrate, was required to consider the Calendra presented before him under Section 145 Cr.P.C., by the SHO. Once he had arrived at a conclusion that there is no requirement of proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C., he did not have any jurisdiction to order that respondents being in illegal possession could be dispossessed by him through Tehsildar, Bhiwani. The Executive Magistrate cannot acquire the powers of a Judicial Magistrate to deliver possession when a Calendra is presented by SHO, without following the legal procedure. I have considered the order of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, in context to the statutory provisions of Section 145 & 146 Cr.P.C. The detailed procedure under Section 145 Cr.P.C., requires the Sub Divisional Magistrate, to issue notice to the concerned parties and after holding an enquiry as envisaged under Sections 145, 142, 143 & 144 arrive at a conclusion whether a party has been forcibly or wrongly dispossessed within two months next before the date on which a report of Police official or other . . . 2 Crl.Rev. No.2420 of 2008 information was received by the Magistrate and then he may get the party so dispossessed as if the party had been in possession on the date of his order under sub Section 1 of Section 145. The Sub Divisional Magistrate, has not held the enquiry in accordance with the procedure of law and therefore, the revisional Court has rightly held the order improper and set aside the same. The petition is dismissed. The order passed by the revisional Court is upheld when it is observed that anything mentioned in this order will be deemed to be an expression of opinion on merits of the case. In case the petitioner feels that he deserves to be in possession of the property, it will be open to him to follow the due process of law and seek possession accordingly. (M.M.S.BEDI) JUDGE April 27, 2010. rka . . . 3