Proceedings under Sections 133, 145, and 147 of the CrPC should be taken only in fitting circumstances. Multiplicity of litigation should be avoided. Disputes between private parties asserting their respective civil rights should go to civil court, unless the Executive Magistrate considers it to be imperative to take recourse to the provisions of the Code to maintain law and order, public tranquility etc.

This is a criminal revision against the judgment and order dated 1981 passed by the Sessions Judge, Jorhat setting aside the order dated 17.12.80 passed by the Executive Magistrate in a proceeding under section 147 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Learned Magistrate had declared possession of the property in favour of the petitioner but the learned Judge quashed the pro­ceedings.

2. Before dealing with the merits of the case, I would like to state a few words as to the use and abuse of proceedings u/ss. 133, 145 and 147 of the Criminal Procedure Code, for short "the Code".

3. The provisions of sections 129 to 148 of "the Code" are meant for dealing with situations which call for "'the main­tenance of public order and tranquility" by Executive Magistrates. The provisions of sections 129 to 132 are invoked to deal with '"unlawful assembly"'. Sections 133 to 143 of "the Code" fall under the head "public nuisance". The provisions of section 144 deal with "the urgent cases of apprehended dangers" whereas sections 145 to 147 of ' the Code" deal with disputes relating to immoveable property. In the case in hand the relevant pro­visions which require our attention are Sections 133 and 147 of "the Code". Every third case is a proceeding under these sec­tions and in most cases the parties are kith and kin. They come from the poor bracket. They fight litigation up to the High Court and the vanquished go back to the civil court for starting another innings of legal battle. Apart from the strained rela­tionship and ill feeling generated between the neighbours and/or relatives, huge expenditures are incurred in the proceedings and sufferers are the poor. Suits in Civil Courts under the specific Relief Act have become rare as the parties obtain readymade preliminary order u/ss. 133, 145 and 147 of "the Code". It is difficult to obtain an injunction in a civil action because the party must satisfy the court about tie prima facie case, the balance of conveniei'3 and irreparable injury. So many hardies are to overcome for obtaining an order of injunction. But to initiate actions u/ss. 134, 145 and 147 of "the Code" to coax and trouble the neighbour or the relatives, drag them to court and let them suffer, the party is just to state that the adversary is dange­rous and daring person and there is apprehension of a breach of the peace. The combat starts which terminates in the High Court, in the process the parties, who are mostly the rural poor suffer agonies, miseries, anxieties, loss of money, time and energy. The time has come when the Executive Magistrates should be careful and circumspect while drawing up proceedings under these sections. They must bear in mind the impact of the pro­ceedings on the poor litigants and the adverse affects on the parties. The ultimate winner in such a proceeding is a nomi­nal winner, in fact, a real loser in money, time, expenses apart from buying strained feeling with neighbour, and relatives. When the door to obtain reliefs under the Specific Relief Act is wide open the Executive Magistrate should direct the parties to ask for the relief in civil court. The proceedings are just stop gap arrangements to avoid a breach of the public peace, tranquility, or to prevent public nuisances and disputes which affect "law and order". If such contingency can be avoided by direc­ting the police to take charge of the situation the Magistrate of that to refer the parties to civil court. However, there may be exceptional and special cases, say, where the poor is oppressed by the and the powerful. It may be that in some cases it might be difficult for a poor party to fight out civil litiga­tion unless he gets protection from the Magistrate. It is nece­ssary to scrutinizes each case carefully and then to initiate a proceeding. However, it must be borne in mind that the very object and the purpose of the provisions are to deal with un­lawful assembly, prevent public nuisance or apprehended dan­ger so that the even tempo of the soc

Click Here to Read the rest of this document