IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR O R D E R S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.665 of 2002. Jagdish Prasad son of Shri Mohari Lal & Another VERSUS The State of Rajasthan through P.P. & Others Date of Order :::: 09/02/2009. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Bhanwaroo Khan Mr. Sudesh Bansal, Counsel for the Petitioners Mr. R.K. Agarwal, Counsel for the Respondents By the Court : Proceedings under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 were initiated by the S.H.O. Police Station Sanganer Sadar, Jaipur against the petitioners as well as the respondent Nos.3 and 4 namely; Madan Lal and Nathu, with the averments that the dispute has arose in between the parties and there is likelihood of breach of peace because litigations are pending in between them. Facts of the case are that on 13.12.1996 an agreement was executed by Pokhar Ram @ Sita Ram in favour of Jagdish Prasad, who on the same day, along with Pokhar Ram @ Sita Ram, in his turn executed an agreement in favour of Madan Lal (respondent No.3 in this petition). The respondent No.3-Madan Lal filed a suit for specific performance of contract against Jagdish Prasad before the District Judge, Jaipur, wherein an order of status-quo in relation to the land in question was issued. Jagdish Prasad also filed a suit before the S.D.O. Jaipur against Madan Lal, wherein an order of status-quo was also passed. Since there was likelihood of breach of peace, a report was made by the S.H.O. before the A.D.M.II, Jaipur City, Jaipur for the appointment of a Receiver. The A.D.M. II, Jaipur City, Jaipur vide its order dated 24.04.1997 appointed a Receiver. Feeling aggrieved of the said order, the petitioner Jagdish Prasad preferred a revision and the same came to be dismissed by the Additional & District & Sessions Judge No.2, Jaipur District Jaipur vide its order dated 29.04.2002. Hence, the petitioners have preferred this criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. before this Court. Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the impugned orders passed by the Courts below as well as record of the case. The order passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge was perused in which it has specifically been mentioned that with regard to the disputed land about of which a civil suit was pending in between the parties, a temporary injunction application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the C.P.C. was filed by both the parties and the same came to be decided vide order dated 04.10.2001 ordering therein that till the final decision of the civil suit possession of Madan Lal be not disturbed. When the civil suits in between the parties are pending in which the Civil Court has prima-facie observed that the possession of Madan Lal, respondent be not disturbed. No illegality, infirmity or perversity has been pointed out in the orders passed by the Courts below. In the light of the civil suits pending between the parties, proceedings under Section 145 of the Cr.P.C. cannot be continued, as prima-facie the Court has observed that the possession of Madan Lal till the final decision of the civil suit be not disturbed. The parties are bound unless the order issued is either set aside by the Higher Courts or any illegality if found under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., then the order issued by the Sessions Judge as revisional Court is binding on the parties. Consequently, this miscellaneous petition stands dismissed. (Bhanwaroo Khan) J. ashok/