Hon'ble Mr. Justice, A.C. Upadhyay

1. This revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 15.2.2012, passed by the learn Additional Sessions Judge (FTC) No.1, Tinsukia in Criminal (Revision) Case No.03(1)/12, whereby the order passed by the learned Executive Magistrate, in Case No.257/2011 drawing up proceeding under Sections 107/145 CrPC, was affirmed. The facts unfolded from the pleadings of the parties may be briefly stated as follows -

The petitioner was served with a notice by the Tinsukia Police on 27.12.2011, whereby he came to learn that the learned Executive Magistrate, Tinsukia by order dated 27.12.2011 passed in Case No.257/2011, drew up a proceeding under Section 107/145 CrPC against the petitioner, opposite party No.2. In the said impugned order DATED 27.12.2011 PASSED IN Case No. 257/2011, the learned Executive Magistrate directed the parties to maintain statusquo and not to involve in any activity that may vitiate the peaceful environment until further orders from the competent authority and also directed to move the Tinsukia Development Authority, for addressing their grievance. The petitioner further states that the aforesaid order was passed without notice to the petitioner/opposite party No.2.

2. The petitioner upon enquiry found that the opposite party No.2 had lodged an ejahar on 25.12.2011 with Tinsukia Police Station stating therein that 18 ft. wide road on the western side of his land situated at S. Dohutia Road, Town Sheet No.5 was encroached upon by the petitioner by digging the land. It was further alleged in the FIR that the petitioner had engaged 5 to 6 persons for digging the said road to fix pillars. When the first informant had requested the petitioner, the petitioner started abusing him with filthy language and also threatened him of dire consequences. On the basis of the aforesaid FIR, Officer-in-charge of the Police Station enquired into the matter submitted NON FIR Case No. R/Pt.I/147/2011 dated 26.12.2011. The relevant extract of the report of the Officer-in-charge of the Police in brief reflects as follows-

During the time of investigation it was found that the First Party and the Second Party were close neighbours. There was a road to the house of the First Party where they are residing and they were using that road. At the time of purchasing the land by the First Party, the aforesaid road was there and it was shown in the map of the Tinsukia Development Authority also. But the Second Party said that the aforesaid road was not there and as such engaged labourers to dig the road and construct a building thereon. On enquiring the local witnesses during the time of investigation, they said that the aforesaid road was there and at the time of investigation, the second party was found digging the road by engaging labourers. But since the land became disputed, the second party was asked to stop the work then and there demarcate the parties even to the extent of death. Hence prayer is made before the Hon'ble Court to draw up a proceeding under Section 107 CrPC and issue summon to both the parties to show cause as to why they cannot reside peacefully and thereafter order them to execute bond. Further it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court will direct seizure of the disputed land under Section 145/146 CrPC. Further enclosing herewith the application of the first party and land documents of the disputed land."

3. On the basis of such information, the learned Executive Magistrate passed the following order -

27.12.2011 : C.R. put up to me on transfer today 27.12.2011. Perused the original petition, police report along with documents furnished. After careful examination it has appeared to me that there exist a dispute between Sri Milan Bhattacharjee, S/O Late Adinath Bhattacharjee of S. Dahutia Road, Borpathar, P.S. Tinsukia herein after referred as the 2nd party regarding a road leading to the residence of 1st party. The police has reported that the 2nd party is trying to construct struct