A dispute concerning proprietary rights over a property is civil in nature and beyond the jurisdiction of a criminal Court to decide.

JUDGMENT :

Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.

1. The instant criminal revisional application has been preferred under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code by the petitioners against the opposite parties being aggrieved by the order No. 18 passed by Learned District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track I at Sealdah in Criminal Motion No. 10/2013 dated 23.12.2013 based on the following grounds :

“(i) For that the Learned Judge erred by failing to take into consideration that nowhere it said in/ established by either P.R. that the passage /courtyard blocked by APs is Confirmed by investigations tenanted portion of A.P.s. as tenanted portion of A.P.s.

Nor at all Any supportive Documents by A.P.S could be given showing that they allowed said Passage as Bathroom or Courtyard as their tenanted portion – or at all Any Proof of their tenancy itself.

Rather like the lower court of Ld. Executive Magistrate, revision court order also based only on AP's false claim, whose own tenancy status itself informed in main petition and application u/s 340 Cr.P.C., as highly questionable/ doubtful.

(ii) For That Learned revision Judge also erred not only by failing to appreciate above informed fact that APs' Status of tenancy NOW technically lapsed due to their fathers (original tenants) demised over 5 years back and letter/s for premises vacation served already to them by power given by owner's agreement to petitioner.

That APs who dared to oppose even court order under claim of tenanted premises, they not at all even paid rent for past 5-10 Years (having no receipt) after their respective Father's Demises.

(iii) For that the Learned Judge erred by failing to take into consideration that petitioners submitted a detailed list of facts to be checked at the site ….. and reported by P.S., as to there being common water tank/pump/common sweet water facilities and a caretaker type room in the back courtyard – whereby said area easily provable as common – which not denied by Police Reporter (P.R.) either.

As such it could be averred from principle of natural justice, that a common area of all tenants and passage leading to it can not be rented out to and/or blocked by any one tenant, even with owner’s permission/concurrence.

(iv) For that the Learned Judge erred by failing to take into consideration also that, even if tenancy of APs could be proved as existing, an inherent Principle of tenancy and/or natural justice was pointed out that such restriction of tenanted space, especially an obvious passage and courtyard with common facilities, does not hold in contingency.

That, especially since not permanent day to day ingress, but entry had been wanted by Petitioners only on Contingent/emergency/occasional basis, for which the tenancy rule of exclusive possession/use does not apply.

That an emergent situation has arisen due to collapse of normal entry path, and for which vital National/State level awarded/important Institute (B.E.S. University Sibpur) documents needed to be saved, as also due inability to repair, portions of the building posing danger to life and limb.

As such to deny only rare/occasional/contingent/emergency entry for repairs and saving vital state papers, even after court’s own order and though petitioners informed that petitioner having suitable agreement with Landlord, surely merited more punishment u/s 188 IPC for longer term. But due denial of only a complaint by concerned court, such exemplary action unable to even begin.

(v) For that, Ld. Executive committed act of self contradiction in that, if tenancy rights of APs seen by Ld. Lower Court as existing, then it may be questioned as to how Ld. Court itself ordered restraint u/s 144 Cr.P.C. – If such initial order passed without proper checking status of parties and/or in such case if that order itself illegal.

(vi) For that the Learned Judge erred by acting out of jurisdiction, since u/s 340 Cr.P.C., the steps that may be taken in any application, are given only as – to examine the records (and when satisfied p