GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Baharul Islam, J.
BALU MIA AND OTHERS
VERSUS
MATIUR RAHMAN CHOUDHURY AND OTHERS
Criminal Reference No. 30 of 1972 (Made by S.J., Cachar at Silchar,)
Decided on : 6-3-1972, January 3, 1974.
Section 145 - Criminal Procedure Code - Summary disposal of proceedings - The court held that the purpose of a proceeding under Section 145 is prevention of breach of the peace and the procedure for disposal of the proceeding is summary. The judgment of the learned Magistrate was considered well and warranted by Sub-section (4) of Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code.
Fact of the Case:
The reference arises from a proceeding under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The learned Magistrate's order declaring the first party to be in possession of the disputed land was challenged by the learned Sessions Judge.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the judgment of the learned Magistrate was well considered and warranted by Sub-section (4) of Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code, rejecting the reference made by the Sessions Judge.
Issues: The issue was whether the learned Magistrate's order under Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code was warranted by Sub-section (4) of the said section.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the purpose of a proceeding under Section 145 is prevention of breach of the peace and the procedure for disposal of the proceeding is summary. It also highlighted that no appeal has been provided against an order passed under Sec. 145, and the party against whom an order is passed has its remedy before a Civil Court.
Final Decision: The reference made by the Sessions Judge was rejected as it was found to have no merit.
This reference has been made by the Sessions Judge, Cachar Silchar, and arises out of a proceeding under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The reference has been made on the ground that the learned Magistrate has not referred to all the documents and affidavits filed by the parties and as such, according to the learned Sessions Judge, the impugned order is not warranted by sub-section (4) of Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code.
2. Shri P. G. Barua, learned counsel appearing in support of the reference leads me through the impugned order passed by the Magistrate, It appears from the order of the Magistrate that after receipt of the initial order the parties appeared; the first party filed its written statements, 11 affidavits and other documents including copy of a decree in a civil suit. The second party also filed its written statement 11 affidavits and some documents. The Magistrate appears to have considered all these documents. He has assessed their value and ultimately came to the conclusion that the first party was in possession of the disputed land. He has disbelieved the case of the second party. So he declared the first party to be in possession of the land.
3. The basic purpose of a proceeding under Section 145 is prevention of breach of the peace and the procedure for disposal of the proceeding is summary. No appeal has been provided against an order passed under Sec. 145. On the top of it the party against whom an order is passed has its remedy before a Civil Court. That being the position, it cannot be expected that the order of the Magistrate under Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code should be as thorough as a judgment in a criminal prosecution or in a civil suit. In my opinion in the instant case the judgment of the learned Magistrate is well considered and cannot be said that it was not warranted by Sub-section (4) of Sec. 145, Criminal Procedure Code, as observed by the learned Sessions Judge.
4. In the result this reference has no merit and is rejected.
Reference rejected.
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.