HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR Criminal Miscellaneous PetitionNo.15/2007 PETJTIONERS & RESPONDENTS v 1. Paluram, son of Jate Raghunandan Patel, aged about 55 years, caste Agharia, 2. Netram Patei, son of Late Raghunandan Pate!, caste Agharia, aged about 50 years, 3 Devcharan, son of Haricharan Patei, aged about 50 years, casfe Aghariya. All are agriculturist, resident of village Kerajhar, P.S. Bhupdeopur, Tahsii and District - Raigarh (C.G.) Versus 1. Dharmendra Kumar, son of Shri Teekaram Patei, aged about 32 years, occupation agriculturist. 2. Teekaram, son of Niranjan Lal Patel, Caste Aghariya, occupation agriculturist, aged about 56 years. Both residents of Kerajhar, Tah. & District - Raigarh (C.G.). 3. State of Chhattisgarh, through - District Magistrate, Raigarh (C.G.) 4. The Sub Divisionai Offlcer (Revenue), Raigarh, Tah. and Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) (PETITION UNDER SECT30N 482 OF Cr.P.C.) Appearance: Shri Roop Naik, Counsei for the petitioners. Shri G.K. Beriwal, Dy. Advocate Generai forthe State. ORAL ORDER (25.04.2007) SUNILKUIVIARSINHA.J. Heard on admission. This peft^on is directed against the order dated 30.11.2006 (Annexure A-1) passed in Criminal Revision No.166/2006 by the Third Additiona! Sessions Judge (FTC), Raigarh. The aforesaid revision was filed against the orders dated 26/10/2006 and 27/10/2006 passed by 1 ^/^—— Cr.M.P.No.15/2007 i-, 'v'^'- the Sub Divisiona! Magistrate, Raigarh under Sections 145 (1) and 146 ofthe Code of Criminal Procedure. It appears that on an Istgasa filed by the Po!ice under Section 145 ofCr.P.C., the learned Magistrate took cognizance jn the matter and passed a preliminarily order under Section 145(^)of Cr.P.C. and thereafter, he also passed an order of attachment under Section 146 of Cr.P.C. Both these orders were chalienged in revision, but the Revisionai Court said that the cognizance taken by the Magistrate was in accordance with law. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in fact, a Civil Suit is already pending in relation to the same property and cognizance under Section145 of Cr.P.C. was a redundant action, whlch shouid not have been taken by the Magistrate. However, he prays for withdrawal of the petition with a liberty to raise the ground of pendency of civil litigation before the concerned Court and to pray for dismissal of the proceeding on the said ground. The prayer is allowed. This petition is dismissed, as withdrawn, with a liberty to the applicants to take the ground of pendency of Civil Suit, if the same is pending, before the appropriate forum in accordance with law. Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge