SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1970 Supreme(MP) 89

S.B.SEN, N.M.GOLVALKER
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – Appellant
Versus
PHODAL HIRA AND ORS. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
G.L.ATHAWALE, P.L.DUBEY, R.D.Sharma

S. B. SEN, J.

( 1 ) THIS case has been referred by Raina J. under Sub-rule (2) of Rule 9 of Chapter I of the High Court Rules, for decision of the following questions:

(i) Whether under Section 147 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure the magistrate is competent to issue a mandatory injunction for the removal of the existing obstruction which is necessary for maintaining status quo and prohibiting the other party from interfering with the right of the aggrieved party, until the matter is decided by a competent Civil Court. (ii) Whether the view expressed by the Nagpur High Court in King emperor v. Abdullah, ILR (1949) Nag 388 = (AIR 1949 Nag 275) which was followed by this Court in State of M, P. v. Sheikh Ramzan, Criminal revn. No. 56 of 1966, D/- 28-9-1966, vide 1967 Jab LJ (SN) 48 is correct.

( 2 ) THE facts which have given rise to this reference are simple. An order under section 147 Cr. P. C. has been passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate P. R. Datar. in Misc. Cr. Case No. 183 of 1965 against Phodal and five others on the application of one Khema directing them to clear the way of Khema to his field No. 1347 from between the fields of Kh. Nos. 4346 and 4347 through the Medh



























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top