A Magistrate is justified in passing an order under Section 146 Cr.P.C. if a party fails to produce evidence to show that they are in possession of the land in dispute.

1. - This revision petition has been filed to quash the order of the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jodhpur dated 16-12-1985 whereby the learned lower court has maintained the order of attachment and the appointment of the Receiver regarding the disputed land bearing Khasras Nos. 177, 188, 190, 368, 369, 370, 373, 596 and 597 and has ordered that the Receiver shall remain in possession of the disputed land till the parties got their rights decided by a competent civil court.

2. The facts necessary to be noticed for the disposal of this revision petition briefly stated are: that non petitioner No. 1 Ramgopal, who is now dead and is represented by his legal heirs, initiated proceedings against non-petitioners Nos. 2 to 8 in this petition on 3-10-1973 in the Court of learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jodhpur. The learned Magistrate after drawing a preliminary order under Section 145(1) Cr PC ordered for the attachment of the land in dispute situate in village Buchakala as he apprehended immediate breach of peace as regards the possession of the land in dispute and appointed a receiver to look-after the land in dispute and the crops which were standing and which may be raised in this land. The non-petitioners Nos. 2 to 8 filed reply and alleged that non-petitioner No. 1 Ramgopal is not in possession of this land. The case was then listed for the evidence of non-petitioner No. 1 but inspite of taking number of adjournments for number of years, he did not produce his evidence and on 16-12-1985 neither the non-petitioner No. 1 was present nor he produced any evidence. His counsel was of course present. From the side of non-petitioners Nos. 2 to 8, none was present. As the case became very old and nobody was producing any evidence, the learned Magistrate thoughr it fit to terminate the proceedings keeping alive the order of attachment issued under Section 146 Cr.PC. It is against this order that this revision petition has been filed. None except non-petitioner No. 6 Bhoora Ram has appeared inspite of service. Non-petitioner No. 6 Bhoora Ram is represented by Shri M.S. Narain Bhatt, Advocate.

3. I have heard Mr. B.L. Kachhawaha, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. M.S. Narain Bhatt; the learned Counsel for non-petitioner No. 6 Bhoora Ram and have carefully gone through the record of the case.

4. Mr. B.L. Kachhawaha, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that before this order dated 16-12-1985 was passed by the learned Magistrate, non-petitioner No. 1 Ramgopal and his mother Mst. Gehra filed a regular revenue suit in respect of this land in dispute against Ganeshram and Ors. . That suit was dismissed by the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate, Jodhpur vide his order dated 8-4-1975. It is alleged that later on, Rampal and his father Ganeshram got mutation of this land done in their favour and from them the petitioner Gokulram has purchased the land bearing Khasras Nos. 368, 369, 370 and 373. Khasra No. 177 has been purchased by non-petitioner No. 10 and Khasras No. 188 and 190 have been purchased by Sohanpuri and Aughandpuri respectively and, therefore, the petitioner Gokulram has brought this revision petition for quashing the order of the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jodhpur.

5. The main contention of Mr. Kachhawaha is that when the rights of the parties have been decided in a revenue suit, no proceedings under Section 145 Cr.PC could be initiated and even if they were initiated, they should have been terminated. In this repect, he has placed reliance on a decision of their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Ram Sumer Puri Mahant v. State of UP and Ors.[AIR 1985 SC 472] . This ruling cannot have any application to the proceedings in hand because neither Gokulram was a party to that civil suit nor the result of that suit was brought to the notice of the learned Magistrate, who has decided this application under Section 145 Cr.PC. It has been frankly conceded by Mr Kachhawaha,