The judgment establishes the importance of adhering to the procedural requirements of Sections 145(1) and 146(1) of the Cr.P.C., emphasizing the need for separate orders and the Executive Magistrate's obligation to satisfy emergent nature before attaching the property.

ORDER

1. By way of filing the instant Misc. Petition, challenge has been made to the order dated 10.02.2022 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Pokran in Criminal Revision No.14/2021 as well as the order dated 25.10.2021 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Pokran in Case No.M7/2019 (Parvati Devi Vs. Harchand Ram & Ors.) whereby the application of the petitioner for detaching the property has been rejected and revision petition has been dismissed.

2. Learned counsel Shri Dinesh Kumar Godara appearing for the petitioner submits that the entire proceeding has been undertaken in direct conflict of law and the same has been done by going beyond jurisdiction. It is further submitted that although there was no imminent danger of breach of peace and tranquility yet upon a complaint made for initiation of proceeding under Section 145 (1) Cr.P.C., learned Executive Magistrate (SDM), Pokran vide its order dated 28.03.2019 directed to institute proceeding under Section 145 (1) Cr.P.C. and issued notice to the parties concerned. No order under Section 146 (1) of the Cr.P.C. i.e. no speaking order regarding attachment of property was passed despite that the SHO concerned took steps for attachment of property under colourable exercise of powers. The petitioner moved an application to the learned SDM, Pokran for releasing the property and submitted that the learned Court concerned has not passed any order of attachment, therefore, the property in question may be directed to be detached but the said application has been dismissed vide impugned order dated 25.10.2021.

3. Learned counsel Shri Godara further submits that aggrieved by the order dated 25.10.2021, the petitioner challenged legality, correctness and propriety of the order by way of filing a revision petition but even the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Pokran has also lost sight to appreciate the correct, legal and factual aspects of the matter and dismissed the Criminal Revision vide order dated 10.02.2022 thus, he submits that since both the order are patently illegal, passed without jurisdiction and without due application of judicial mind, therefore, continuance of the orders passed by the Courts below would surely amount to an abuse of process of law, therefore, to secure the ends of justice interference by this Court is called for.

4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor for the State. Perused the relevant material placed before me.

5. It is manifesting from the bare perusal of the order dated 28.03.2019 that while directing to institute proceeding under Section 145 (1) of the Cr.P.C., the learned SDM, Pokran had not passed any order under Section 146 (1) of the Cr.P.C. and no such finding or observations were made therein despite that the SHO Pokran proceeded to attach the property for which neither he was directed nor he was having any power to attach the same in accordance with the procedure established by law. It seems that the SHO, Pokran has acted in an arbitrary manner. When the application was moved for releasing the property, the learned SDM, Pokran did not apply its judicial mind and rejected the prayer for releasing the property from attachment in a very fanciful manner. When the order was challenged before the revisional Court even the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Pokran, in a very capricious manner, rejected the revision while ignoring the factual and legal aspects of the matter. The approach of the learned SDM, Pokran as well as learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Pokran cannot be appreciated, rather this Court feels deep aversion to the manner in which the orders have been passed by the Courts below as the same is bad in the eyes of law.

5. A plain reading of the provision under Section 145 of the Cr.P.C. provides that whenever an Executive Magistrate is satisfied from the report of a police officer or upon other information that a dispute likely to ca