Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE
Sayyad Ayaz Ali, s/o Magdum Ali – Appellant
Versus
Sub Divisional Magistrate, Nagpur City, Nagpur – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.
1. The present application is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of order dated 29.12.2023 passed by learned Sub Divisional Magistrate at Nagpur in Criminal Case No.5/2022 under Section 145 of the Code.
2. Facts giving rise to the application are as under:
The Assistant Police Inspector of Gittikhadan Police Station, Nagpur had submitted a report to the Special Executive Magistrate/Sub Division Officer, Nagpur City on 5.9.2023 contending that plot Nos.23A , 24, 25 to 29, and 34 and 35A situated at Shashikant Cooperative Society were purchased by one Prakash Goyal, Om Mittal, and present applicants in the year 2012 from Shri Shashikant Bodad, the President of the said Housing Society. The plot No.23A and 24 were owned by Prakash Goyal and Om Mittal and the applicants had no concern with those plots as partition already took place between them as to the distribution of the properties. After partition, plot Nos.23A and 24 are already sold by Om Mittal and Prakash Goyal to one Shyamkumar Daulat Barve. At present, both plots are disputed properties and the dispute is pending in the civil court at Nagpur. As per the parti
The court ruled that maintaining status quo under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is justified to prevent a breach of public peace in ongoing land ownership disputes.
The proceedings under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are intended to maintain public order and do not adjudicate property title, focusing instead on actual possession to prevent breach....
The ingredients necessary for passing an order under Section 145 (1) of the Code would not automatically attract for the attachment of the property. Under Section 146, a Magistrate has to satisfy him....
Injunction cannot be passed against a co-owner, and possession is crucial in resolving disputes under Section 145 of CrPC. Civil court decisions are binding on criminal court proceedings, and multipl....
The invocation of Section 144 requires clear evidence of an emergency; it cannot be used to interfere with ongoing civil disputes without sufficient justification.
Courts must focus on possession and breach of peace under Section 145 Cr.P.C., and not decide title or right of possession. Proceedings under Section 145/146 Cr.P.C. must end if Civil Court is seized....
Criminal proceedings under Sections 145 and 146 Cr.P.C cannot overrule ongoing civil litigation regarding property ownership, necessitating the maintenance of status quo in possession.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
