Back
FARJAND ALI
Mohammad Ramjan – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
Farjand Ali, J.
By way of filing the instant Criminal Misc. Petitions, challenge has been made to the order dated 26.05.2023 whereby the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Hanumangarh, in Cases No.01/2023 & 02/2023 initiated an inquiry under Section 145 of the Cr.P.C. and passed an order under Section 146(1) of the Cr.P.C. thereby appointed a receiver regarding attachment of property in question as well as against the orders dated 26.06.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions No.2, Hanumangarh in Criminal Revision Petitions No.41/2023 & 42/2023 whereby the revision petitions filed by the petitioners have been rejected.
2. Bereft of elaborate details, the facts necessary for disposal of the appeals would be that the petitioners are the Khatedars-tenants of the land in question. It is revealing that a certain part of total land was purchased by the respondents-Shewta Goyal and Leeja Goyal from some of the Khatedars vide sale deeds dated 30.01.2019. It is further revealing that the land in question had not been divided between the parties. It is further revealing that the part of the land which was sold to the respondents Leeja Goyal and Shewta Goyal was under hypothecatio
Executive Magistrate must ascertain actual possession and genuine threat to peace before initiating proceedings under Sections 145 and 146 Cr.P.C.
Proceedings under Sections 145 and 146 Cr.P.C. require a serious question of possession and cannot continue if civil proceedings regarding the same property are pending.
The Executive Magistrate cannot adjudicate ownership or title; only the question of possession is within their jurisdiction under Sections 145 and 146 of the Cr.P.C.
The Court emphasized that vague assertions of breach of peace are insufficient for an attachment order under Sections 145 and 146 of the Cr.P.C.
The Executive Magistrate must determine actual possession and cannot adjudicate rights; attachment of property requires emergent circumstances and imminent danger of breach of peace.
An order of attachment under Section 146(1) Cr.PC requires proof of likelihood of breach of peace and determination of possession, which was not established in this case.
Criminal courts should not intervene in property disputes already subject to civil litigation unless there is an imminent threat to public peace.
The court emphasized that attachment orders under emergency provisions must be backed by compelling evidence of imminent danger to public peace, otherwise it constitutes a misuse of legal process.
Point of Law : Section 145 of Code concerned with restoration of possession and prevention of breach of peace and tranquillity.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
