S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 1691 of 2009

Vijay Singh vs. Naresh Chander Joshi and ors.

----

13.3.2012

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA

Mr. Rajesh Kapoor for the petitioner

Mr. Ajeet Bhandari for the non-petitioner No.1.

---

This criminal misc. petition has been filed

under section 482 Cr.P.C. by the petitioner against

the order dated 26.9.2007 of Additional Sessions

Judge Fast Track No.1 Jhunjhunu in Criminal

revision No. 95 of 2006 filed by the petitioner

whereby the revision was dismissed and order dated

30.12.2003 passed by the SDM was upheld.

It is stated in the petition that on

25.11.2003 the respondent No.1 filed a false report

before the SDM Chirawa stating therein that t he

petitionerand the respondents 2 to 4 lhave taken

forcible possession of the play ground of Birla

Public School, and have constructed 8 feet wall

thereby closing the aggress and ingress to the play

ground. The SDM sent the said complaint to the

Police Station Pilani who registeed a case under

section 145 Cr.Pl.c. And filed the same before the

SDM on 16.12.2003. From the report of the police

it was evident that no affidavit were filed but

still the SDM on the same date without application

of mind appointed receiver on the disputed land

and fixed the case for 22.12.2003. On 22.12.2003

the petitioner appeared and sought time for filing

reply, while the repondents 2 to 4 were proceeded

exparte. The petitioner sought time for filing

reply on 24.12.2003 due to non- availability of

documents due to winter vacation in the civil

court. The time was allowed but the SDM granted

last opportunity

and fixed the matter for

26.12.2003. On 26.12.2003, the SDM recorded the

statement of the respondent No.1 and no opportunity

was

afforded for cross examiantion of the

witnesses to the petitioner. The SDM after hearing

the arguments of the parties fixed the matter for

-2-

judgment on 30.12.2003. The SDM in the order dated

30.12.2003 stated that the respondent No.1 was in

possession on the first date and directed the

receiver to hand over the possession of the

disputed land. Aggrieved against the order

dated 30.12.2003 the petitioner filed a revision

petition before the Sessions Judge Jhunjhunu which

was transferred to the court of Addl. Sessions

Judge Fast TrackNo.1 Jhunjhunu and the Addl.

Sessions Judge vide judgment dated 26.9.2007

rejected the revision petition of the petitioner.

I have gone through the order of the SDM and the

revisional court and the material available on

record and in my opinion both the orders do not

suffer from any perversity so as to interfere in

the inherent jurisdiction of this court under

section 482 Cr.P.C. It is an admitted fact that on

the first date of hearing when the matter was taken

up the respondent No.1 was in possession of the

land in dispute and they have produced the

documents in relation to the land in dispute and

the petitioner has not produced any document or

affidavit to prove their possession. In these

circumstances the SDM rightly handed over the land

in dispute to the respondent No.1. This finding of

the SDM was examined by the Addl. Sessions Judge

and the Addl. Sessions Judge has correctly observed

in its order for refusing to interfere with the

order of SDM. In this matter the civil suit is also

pending in between the parties. Thus in these

circumstances I do not find any force in the

criminal misc. petition and the same is hereby

rejected. The misc. stay application also stands

rejected.

(Mahesh Chandra Sharma) J.

Pareek/-All corrections made in the judgment/order have

been incorporated in the judgment/ order being emailed

(O P Pareek)

PS-cum JW