In an inquiry under Section 139-A of the Cr.P.C., the Magistrate's role is limited to determining if there is prima facie reliable evidence in support of the denial of a public right, and he is not to weigh the evidence or decide on the existence of the public right.

JUDGEMENT

Order:- This revision is directed against an order passed under S. 133, Cr. P. C. The members of the second party are petitioners, The case of the first party is that he and the members of the second party have got residential houses in the bustee. The main village lane runs from east to west adjacent to that plot. There is a bi-lane nearby. The cowshed and house of the petitioner lie to the west of the bi-lane. Due to land dispute between the parties, the members of the second party have erected a mud-wall by the side of the cowshed of the first party which is a public passage. As such, the people of the locality as well as the cattle of the first party are obstructed from using the bi-lane and this has resulted in hardship to a great extent. Accordingly, the first party claims that the members of the second party have unlawfully obstructed the public road by putting the mud-wall over it.

The members of the second party have denied the existence of any public road or public right over any road and contend that the mud-wall in question has been erected on their own land which is set apart as a lane for their own use, They have purchased the said land from the previous owner by a registered sale-deed dated 8-7-1968. They have also denied the plea of passage of the cattle of the first party through that land and the alleged public right over the same.

2. The learned Magistrate while holding inquiry exercising his jurisdiction under S. 139-A of the Cr. P. C. (old) has held that he is inclined to hold that the denial of public way or public right is a mere pretence and, therefore, he made the preliminary order absolute.

3. In cases falling under S. 139-A, Cr. P. C. (old), the Magistrate has to hold an inquiry as laid down therein. He has to direct the party against whom the provisional order has been made to appear before him and deny the existence of the public right in question. Such party shall also produce some "reliable evidence' and that such evidence shall be legal evidence which will support his denial. Once these conditions are satisfied, the Magistrate loses jurisdiction and is bound to refer the matter to the Civil Court for adjudication. He has no jurisdiction to weigh the evidence and decide on which side the balance tilts. The inquiry u/s. 139-A is in the nature of an ex parte summary inquiry, and what the Magistrate is to see is whether there is a prima facie reliable evidence in support of the denial and not that the non-existence of the public right should be affirmatively proved. It is not the duty of the Magistrate to take evidence of both the sides and then to judge if the party against whom the order has been made has succeeded in establishing the non-existence of the public right. If the evidence adduced by the party against whom the order is made is legal and reliable, there is an end of the matter and the Magistrate has to stay his hands and refer the parties to the Civil Court. It is not the duty of the Magistrate to decide the question of title. His duty is merely to see that any claim to a piece of land alleged to be a public place or a public way is not frivolous and is bona fide, The question of title is not intended to be decided in a summary proceeding by a Magistrate in a criminal case. "Reliable evidence" as envisaged under Section 139-A, Cr. P. C. means evidence on which it is possible for the Court to place reliance. It does not mean that the evidence is such that it definitely establishes title to the land. If that is the meaning of the term, it will be unnecessary in any case to refer the matter to the Civil Court. In other words, reliable evidence is the evidence of reliable persons and all that a Magistrate has to satisfy is that the evidence produced is not false. What is meant by the section is not that the Magistrate should weigh the evidence produced by both the parties and then come to the conclusion which is more reliable or should be referred. The object of S. 139-A is that if th