£—78 S^'^l'Mlrt'M, »Tfl'«'l<S,RlOK-fy Nt^ctl *t|l*_r^M.......l^.i6.t. •'i^a;:i"M 3D^?1 ?H K(-ft°b ^sff 3TT^FT sfflt^ f^;-S":CT. an^yr IRR; (4°iil'!i<(i) cfiral<vf4^ HH<viT ^f^t^i' <^i^i< ^affinsir^r HIGH COURT OF OHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SINGLB BENCH : HON'ISLE SHRI DHIRENDRA. MISHRA. J CR.M.ff. N0. 169 OF 2007 APPLICANTS NON-APPLICANTS 1. 2. Son Sai, S/o. Dakhal, Aged about 40 years Shyain Bihari, S/o. Dakhal, Aged about 42 years 3. Roiiha S/o. Dakhal, aged about 45 years AU are by caste Gond, AU r/o, viUage Silouta, P.S. & Tahsil Pratappur Vs. 1. Raia Chandar, S/o. Gahbal Aged about 40 years Mohan S/o. Rameshwar Aged about 45 vears Sodhaa, S/o. Rameshwar, Aged about 42 years Nadhir S/o. Rajaram Aged about 45 years Sahbar S/o. MuraU, Aged about 60 years Suinaatu S/o. Murali, Aged about 28 vears AU by caste Gond, R/o. ViBage SUouta, P.S. and TahsU Pratappur Distt. Sarguja (CG) 2. 25.07.2007 Shn D.N.Prajapati,jcounsel for the petitioner. Slu-i G.K.Beriwal, py. A.G. for the State. 1 Heard on admissiott. The petitioners have preferred fhis application under Section 482 of fhe Cr.P.CE. for auashinent offhe orders nsssed 'jwi ^ii<iiit?'i<<, ®Tn+i'Ks,faKrtiyy sl!B?:-sa*:s»si '•V^f ^^••y^v sn^i.^r 'Bna^ € •S^ 200 -z- by leamed Sessions Judge 174/2006 & fhe order t)assed by leamed Sub Divisional Magistrate m Crimm.al Ca^e No. 276/2004 dated 23.06.2006 as the criminal revision. hfes been disuiissed and order of fhe leanied Sub Divisional Mi jigistrate rejectmg application uzider Sectiou 145 offhe Cr.P.C. tias been confinned. Learaed coynsel for WlfewtT tH*RS tf fS^'(f^SK ^r sififET sn^i (FTC) Pratappur ia Cr. Revision No. fbc applicant subinits that from. the perusal of bofh the recc|rds it would be evident fh.at fhe applicaats are recorded onjners ofthe disputed laiid. However, leamed Sub Divisional M^gistrate on the basis of erroneous appreciation of evidence atraUable ou record has held fhat fhe non applicaitts were in posjsession since before aad accordiugly directed retum of fhe attacjhed land to fhe non applicants. Froni perusal of thej orders passed by both fhe Courts below it is observed that adcordiag to tlie Courts below the non appticaats wei'e in posses^ion of the attached property before two inonths Irom filing th^ proceediugs under Section 145 of the Cr.P.C. aad on the basis of such findiag the oi-der impugned has been pas^ed. Takuig io.to coasideration fhe findings ofbofh the Court^ below no in.terference is called for. In fhe result, the p^tition beiug devoid of substaace is Uable to be disinissed at| fhe adiaission stage itself aad is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge GRPRJ— FS/246—2/2007 —-50,UOO.