HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 1290/2022

1.

Abdul Rahman Son Of Hazi Hussain Khan, Resident Of

Ward No. 40, Mohalla Mominpura, Town Fatehpur, District

Sikar (Raj) ( Since Died Through His Legal Heirs ).

2.

Bismilla Bano Wd/o Late Hazi Hussain Khan, Aged About

70 Years, Resident Of Ward No. 40, Mohalla Mominpura,

Town Fatehpur, District Sikar (Raj).

3.

Kulshumbano Wd/o Late Abdul Rahman, Aged About 31

Years, Resident Of Ward No. 40, Mohalla Mominpura,

Town Fatehpur, District Sikar (Raj).

4.

Jainab Khan Daughter Of Late Abudl Rahman, Aged About

12 Years, Minor Through Theri Natural Guardian Mother

Kulshum Bano Wd/o Late Abdul Rahman, Resident Of

Ward No. 40, Mohalla Mominpura, Town Fatehpur, District

Sikar (Raj).

5.

Hasbi Khan Daughter Of Late Abdul Rahman, Aged About

9 Years, Minor Through Theri Natural Guardian Mother

Kulshum Bano Wd/o Late Abdul Rahman, Resident Of

Ward No. 40, Mohalla Mominpura, Town Fatehpur, District

Sikar (Raj).

6.

Insha Kha Daughter Of Late Abdul Rahman, Aged About 7

Years, Minor Through Theri Natural Guardian Mother

Kulshum Bano Wd/o Late Abdul Rahman, Resident Of

Ward No. 40, Mohalla Mominpura, Town Fatehpur, District

Sikar (Raj).

7.

Ajmal Khan Son Of Late Abdul Rahman, Aged About 4

Years, Through Theri Natural Guardian Mother Kulshum

Bano Wd/o Late Abdul Rahman, Resident Of Ward No. 40,

Mohalla Mominpura, Town Fatehpur, District Sikar (Raj).

----Petitioners

Versus

1.

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

2.

Harphool Singh Son Of Amra Ram, Resident Of

Daulatabad Fatehpur, District Sikar (Raj).

3.

Mohammad Ali Son Of Hazi Hussain Khan, Resident Of

Ward No. 40, Mohalla Mominpura, Town Fatehpur, District

Sikar (Raj).

(2 of 4)

[CRLMP-1290/2022]

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. Ripu Daman Singh Naruka

For State

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Imran Khan, PP

Mr. Amit Singh Shekhawat

Mr. Anil Agarwal

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR

Order

25/07/2022

Heard the parties.

Petitioners have challenged the order dated 10.06.2019

passed in Case No.1/2019, whereby, the learned Sub Divisional

Magistrate, Fetehpur, Shekhawati has attached Plot No.347/1

(New Plot No.594) under Section 146 Cr.P.C. and a receiver has

been appointed.

The petitioners have further challenged the order of the

Revisional Court dated 19.01.2022 passed in Criminal Revision

No.52/2019, whereby, the Revisional Court refused to interfere

with the order of the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate.

Without going into the factual details, the challenge is on the

ground that no case for attachment was there as the requirement

of Section 146 Cr.P.C. was not fulfilled. As such initial order is bad

in law. As such order of confirmation of the said order by the

Revisional Court is also bad in law.

Learned counsel for private respondents contends that the

order is interim in nature. Moreover, there is material on the

record to substantiate the correctness of the order of the learned

SDM. The provisions of Section 146 Cr.P.C. are in three parts and

in the case of emergency if other requirements are not fulfilled,

the property can be attached.

(3 of 4)

[CRLMP-1290/2022]

Section 146(1) Cr.P.C. is being reproduced below:-

“146. Power to attach subject of dispute and to

appoint receiver.

(1) If the Magistrate at any time after making

the order under sub- section (1) of section 145

considers the case to be 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: Provided that such

Magistrate may withdraw the attachment at