The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Magistrate's satisfaction and the mandatory requirement of stating grounds in writing for passing a preliminary order under S.145(1) of the Code are essential, and the lack of such satisfaction and grounds can render the order liable to be quashed.

1. This is a petition filed under S.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by 'C' party Nos.1 and 2 in M C. 20 of 1976, now pending before the Sub Divisional Magistral, Trivandrum, praying for quashing the preliminary order passed in the said proceedings.

2. A proceeding under S.145 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, which will hereinafter be referred to as the Code, was initiated by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Trivandrum, on the basis of a report submitted by the Sub Inspector of Police, Poovar. On 17th April, 1976, the Sub Divisional Magistrate passed an order purporting to be a preliminary order under subsection (1) of S.145 of the Code, in respect of the property described in the schedule to the order, and requiring the parties concerned in the dispute to attend her court in person or by pleader on the date specified therein and put in written statements of their respective claims regarding the actual possession of the subject of dispute.

3. This order is sought to be set aside mainly on the ground that the order in question is one passed without jurisdiction as the learned Magistrate had not applied her mind and got herself satisfied as required under S.145(1) of the Code.

4. It was argued that it is clear from the order of the learned Magistrate that she had not applied her mind and got hereself satisfied that a dispute likely to cause a breach of the peace existed, that she has not stated the reasons or grounds in the order, that the order is based solely on the report of the police and that therefore the entire order is vitiated by illegality and the same is liable to be quashed. The counsel for respondents 1 and 2 on the other band contended that it is not necessary that a Magistrate, should state in the order the reasons or the grounds of his or her satisfaction and that there are sufficient materials available in the case for passing a preliminary order under S 145 of the Code. Counsel also contended that none of these defects can affect the legality of the order or the jurisdiction of the Magistrate to pass appropriate orders under S.145 of the Code and therefore this petition has only to be dismissed. The counsel also faintly argued that the petition is not maintainable.

5. The very jurisdiction of the concerned Sub Divisional Magistrate to initiate the proceeding has been questioned by the petitioners. The very foundation of the order is attacked and as such it cannot be said that this petition is not maintainable under S.482 of the Code. S.45(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure reads:

"Whenever an Executive Magistrate is satisfied from a report of a police officer or upon other information that a dispute likely to cause a breach of the peace exists concerning any land or water or the boundaries thereof, within his local jurisdiction, be shall make an order in writing, stating the grounds of his being so satisfied, and requiring the parties concerned in such dispute to attend his Court in person or by pleader, on a specified date and time, and to put in written statements of their respective claims as respects the facts of actual possession of the subject of dispute".

The section provides a summary remedy and is intended to meet an emergent situation and to avoid a breach of the peace occurring. On a careful reading of S.145 as a whole, particularly sub-section (1), it could be seen that the very foundation of an action under the sub-section is the satisfaction of the Magistrate that a dispute likely to cause a breach of the peace existed on the date of the preliminary order, concerning the possession to any land or water or boundaries thereof situated within his or her local jurisdiction. There is nothing in the section to indicate that the Executive Magistrate is bound to pass a preliminary order as enjoined under sub section (1) of S.145 of the Code, immediately on receipt of a report of the police or complaint or other information that a dispute regarding the possession of an immovable prop