CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9653 OF 2002 ---- In the matter of an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973. ---- 1. SMT. RAMPATI DEVI W/O DURGI MAHTO 2. CHANDO MAHTO 3. BHARAT MAHTO 4. MAHENDRA MAHTO ALL SONS OF DURGI MAHTO, ALL RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PACHAMBA, TOLA-BIJHO, P.S. KAWAKOLE, DISTRICT NAWADAH. ... ... PETITIONERS. Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. CHAMARI TURIYA SON OF LBUDHAN TURIYA 3. SURESHWAR DEVI 4. CHINTA DEVI DAUGHTERS OF KUNJAL TURIYA 5. MAHABIR TURIYA SON OF HULAS TURIYA 6. DULLI @ SAHDEO TURIYA 7. PARMESHWAR TURIYA 8. SITARAM TURIYA, SONS OFL GANESH TURIYA. 9. KAILEE DEVI D/O GANESH TURIYA 10. GIRJA DEVI D/O LAKHAN TURIYA 11. KARA TURIYA 12. SURAJDEO TURIYA, SONS OF LAKHAN TURIYA 13. SONIYA DEVI 14. PARWATIYA DEVI, DAUGHTERS OF GANGO TURIYA 15. KARMANI RAM SON OF MATHURA RAM 16. KARTIK RAM SON OF MATHURA RAM 17. LAKHAN RAM SON OF CHAMARI TURIYA 18. BUDHWA TURIYA @ BUDWA TURIYA SON OF BIRO TURIYA 19. BADO TURIYA SON OF BIRO TURIYA @ JUTAN TURIYA 20. SITARAM TURIYA SON OF JHAUR TURIYA @ MANGAN TURIYA 21. AMBIKA TURIYA SON OF KANHAI TURIYA ALL RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PACHAMBA TOLA- BIJHO, P.S. KAWAKOLE, DISTRICT NAWADAH. ... ... OPPOSITE PARTIES. ---- For the Petitioners : Mr. Bharat Lal, Adv. For O.P. Nos.2 to 21: Mr. Rabi Bhushan Prasad-1,Adv. For the State : Mr. A.M.P. Mehta, A.P.P. ---- P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ---- Rakesh Kumar,J. Four petitioners, while invoking inherent 2 jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, have prayed for quashing of an order dated 7.2.2002 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Nawadah Sadar in Case No.1316 of 2001 whereby a proceeding under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was converted to the proceeding under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and both the parties were restrained from going to the disputed land. 2. Short fact of the case is that a proceeding under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was initiated on the prayer made by the opposite parties 2 to 21. Subsequently, the said proceeding was converted to a proceeding under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the order dated 7.2.2002. 3. Aggrieved with the order of initiation of proceeding under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioners have approached this Court by filing the present petition. On 7.10.2002, while issuing notice to opposite party nos.2 to 21, this Court directed that as an interim measure, further proceedings before the Sub- Divisional Magistrate, Nawadah Sadar in connection with Case No.1316 of 2001 shall remain stayed until further orders and thereafter, on 13.8.2003, the 3 case was admitted for hearing and it was directed that in the meantime, the order dated 7.2.2002 passed in Case No.1316 of 2001 by the S.D.M., Nawadah, Sadar shall remain stayed and order of stay is still continuing. 4. It was submitted by Shri Bharat Lal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that the dispute in relation to the land in question was already settled by a competent court of civil jurisdiction. Learned counsel for the petitioners has referred to Annexure-2 to the petition at pages 20-32. Learned counsel for the petitioners has specifically pointed out page-30 internal page-11 of the judgment and decree dated 24.7.2001 passed in Title Suit No.15 of 1990. The learned Sub Judge-III, Nawadah has declared the title and peaceful possession over the land in question in favour of the petitioners. Accordingly, it has been submitted that since the competent court of civil jurisdiction has held the title as well as possession of the petitioners, besides the fact that petitioners are still continuing with the peaceful possession over the land in question, there was no requirement by the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate to initiate the proceeding under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal 4 Procedure. Accordingly, it has been prayed to set aside the impugned order. 5. Shri Bharat Lal, learned counsel for the petitioners, has also submitted that against the judgment and decree dated 24th July,2001 passed in in Ttitle Suit No.15 of 1990, the opposite parties have filed an appeal, which is pending. 6. Shri Rabi Bhushan Prasad-1, learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party nos.2 to 21 has strongly opposed the contention of Shri Bharat Lal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners. It was submitted by Shri Rabi Bhushan Prasad-1, learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party nos.2 to 21 that still the opposite parties are in peaceful possession over the land in question on the strength of parwana issued in their favour by the competent authority. It was stated that since the petitioners were trying to dispossess the opposite parties, they were constrained to file the petition for initiation of proceeding under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate has rightly converted the proceeding under Section 144 of the Cr.P.C. to a proceeding under Section 145 of the Cr.P.C. On the aforesaid ground, it was prayed to reject the 5 present petition. 7. I have also heard Shri A.M.P. Mehta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the State. 8. Besides hearing learned counsel for the parties, I have also perused the materials available on record particularly the judgment and decree dated 24th July,2001 passed in Title Suit No.15 of 1990. Once a competent court of the civil jurisdiction has decided and held title and peaceful possession of the petitioner over the land in question, the court is of the opinion that there was no justification for the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate to start a proceeding under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Moreover, the conversion of a proceeding under Section 144 of the Cr.P.C. to a proceeding under Section 145 of the Cr.P.C. was passed long back in the year 2002 and the said order was already stayed by this Court and this Court, by its order dated 7.10.2002. Keeping in view the fact that order impugned was already stayed by this Court and the court of civil jurisdiction has already held title and possession over the land in question in favour of the petitioners, there is no need to allow the proceeding under Section 145 of the Cr.P.C. to 6 further proceed and as such the impugned order dated 7.2.2002 passed in Case No.1316 of 2001 pending before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Nawadah and other subsequent orders are hereby set aside and petition stands allowed. ( Rakesh Kumar,J.) PATNA HIGH COURT Dated 27.8.2010 N.A.F.R./N.H.