The Magistrate has the jurisdiction to pass the order of attachment under Section 146 Cr. P. C. after making the preliminary order under Section 145(1) Cr. P. C. and the non-recording of two separate orders, one for the preliminary order and the other for the order of attachment, would at the most amount to an irregularity, which would be curable under Section 465 Cr. P. C.

( 1 ) THE petitioners filed an application under Section 145 Cr. P. C. with respect to immovable property. The learned Magistrate being satisfied that there was an apprehension of the breach of peace, passed a preliminary order on 24th March, 1976. Considering the case one of emergency, Me also directed attachment of the property. Aggrieved by this order a revision was filed by the opposite parties before the Sessions Judge, Hamirpur. This revision was dismissed on 30th April, 1976. Thereafter none of the parties approached this Court, with the result that the order dated 24th March, 1976 became final between the parties. It appears from a perusal of Annexure 5 that on 15th May, 1976 the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Mahoba directed the opposite parties to file their written statement and to produce evidence in support of their respective claim by 21st May 1976. Aggrieved by this order the instant application under Section 482 Cr. P. C. was filed in this Court.

( 2 ) IT may be mentioned at this stage that the crops which constituted the subject- matter of the dispute were in the custody of the Receiver appointed by the civil court. These crops have been sold and the auction money amounting to Rs. 21,000/- is lying in deposit in the court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Mahoba.

( 3 ) I have heard learned Counsel for the parties. The petitioner contended that after an Order of attachment is passed under Section 146 Cr. P. C. (New) by the Magistrate on the ground that the case is one of emergency, he has no jurisdiction to decide the dispute with regard to the property involved therein, and that the rights of the parties have to be determined by a competent court. He submits that since the order of attachment was passed on 24th March, 1976 and since that order has now become final between the parties, it is not open to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate to proceed further and to direct the parties to file their written tatementa and to produce their evidence in support of their respective claims.

( 4 ) COUNSEL for the opposite parties, on the other hand, has contended that the order dated 24th March, 1976 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate was without jurisdiction. He submits that a preliminary order under Section 145 (1) Cr. P. C. must precede the passing of an order attaching the disputed property under Section 146 Cr. P. C. In short, the submiflsion is that the preliminary order and the order of attachment cannot be a combined order, each must be a separate order, one following the other.

( 5 ) THE further admitted facts in this case are that Suit No. 16 of 1976 is pending in the court of the District Judge, Hamirpur, between the parties with respect to the subject-matter in dispute, the proceeds of which are lying In deposit with the Sub-Divisional Magistrate. It is also admitted by the parties that a suit under Section 229-B read with Section 176 of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act is also pending between the parties in which the rights of the contestants have to be decided.

( 6 ) SECTION 146 (1) Cr. P. C. New runs as follows:

(1) If the Magistrate at any time after making the order under Sub-section (1) of Section 145 considers the case to toe one of emergency, or if he decides that none of the parties was then in such possession as is referred to in Section 145, or if he is unable to satisfy himself as to which of them was then in such possession of the subject of dispute, he may attach the subject of dispute until a competent Court has determined the rights of the parties thereto with regard to the person entitled to the possession thereof -. . . . . . . . . (2) When the Magistrate attaches the subject of dispute, he may, if no receiver in relation to such subject of dispute has been appointed by any Civil Court, make such arrangements as he considers proper for looking after the property or if he thinks fit, appoint a receiver thereof, who shall have subject to the control of the Magistra