The present petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the order passed by the Executive Magistrate i.e. Tahsildar, and Sangamner in Chapter Case No.120/99 under Section 107 of Cr.P.C. and Chapter Case No.21/ I1t 99 under Section 110 of Cr.P.C.

2. The brief facts narrated in the of petition are as under:

It is the case of the petitioner that part of Gat No.458 of village Chinchpur is in g possession of the petitioner since last more than 50 years and his Gram Panchayat House No.251 o is standing on the said land. One Shri. Dagadue Patilba Tambe and his sons are not concerned d with the property, in any manner, yet they were s disturbing peaceful possession of the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner filed declaratory and y injunction suit in civil Court against said Dagadu Patilba Tambe in which interim order of status quo was passed in favour of the petitioner. Shri. Dagadu Tambe was having personal grudge against the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that said Dagadu tried to harass the petitioner and his family members. Hence, on 14th March, 1999 the petitioner's son namely Raju had given complaint to respondent no.3 but, no action was taken by the respondent no.3 on said complaint. The said Dagadu Patilba Tambe gave false complaint against the petitioner and his two sons namely Vijay and Raju and subsequently, added name of 3rd son of the petitioner i.e. Sanjay in the said complaint. The police registered N.C. against the petitioner and his sons without ascertaining the truth and by registering said N.C. the report was forwarded under Section 107 of Cr.P.C. by respondent no.3 to Respondent no.2 on 15.3.1999 for taking action against the petitioner and his sons. It is further case of the petitioner that on the very same day the petitioner and his three sons were directed to execute P.R. bonds and produce solvent surety of Rs.25,000/- each.

3. It is further case of the petitioner that said Dagadu Tambe and his family members were harassing the petitioner and his family and, therefore, Sanjay Tambe, son of the petitioner was constrained to give complaint against said Dagadu and his sons in Sangamner Taluka Police Station on 19.3.1999. Initially, police persons were reluctant to accept the complaint of the son of the petitioner. However, subsequently Chapter Case No.178/99 U/S 107 of Cr.P.C. was registered against said Dagadu Tambe and his sons, and only surety bond of Rs.l0,000/- was asked from them. It is the case of the petitioner that again on 17.3.1999 said Dagadu Tambe filed another complaint against the petitioner contending therein that the petitioner had threatened him that "today you will be murdered and for that we have prepared well". On these vague allegations respondent no.3 forwarded report after lapse of 13 days i.e. on 30.3.1999 under Section 1l0(e), (g) of Cr.P.C. before the respondent no.2 and accordingly, Chapter Case No.21/99 was registered against the petitioner.

4. In the said Chapter Case No.21/ 99 the petitioner was arrested for by respondent no.3 under the powers u/s. 41(2) of Cr.P.C. and was detained for three hours and subsequently he was released. It is further case of the petitioner that though the petitioner is a Government servant working as Office Superintendent in Panchayat Samiti, Sangamner, yet ye was illegally arrested without prior permission of the Block Development Officer and he was illegally prosecuted without prior permission of the higher authorities.

5. It is further case of the petitioner that in the said Chapter case it was incumbent on the respondents to ascertain the truth and then only to proceed further but, without doing so and without following procedure as required by Chapter VIII of Cr.P.C., immediately on the next day, the respondent no.2 passed an order on the said Chapter Case asking the petitioner to produce cash surety of Rs.25,000/- and solvent surety of Rs.50,000/- and that too of a Government Servant by way of interim order u/ s.116(3) of Cr.P.C.