Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!

Scanned Judgements…!

Checking relevance for Syed Abdul Rub VS Shanti Agarwal...

Syed Abdul Rub VS Shanti Agarwal - 2019 0 Supreme(SC) 2311 : If a revisional petition challenging an order of the magistrate under Section 145 and Section 146 of the Cr.P.C. is quashed by the revisional court, the order under Section 146 Cr.P.C. (attachment of property) becomes illegal and void. This is because attachment under Section 146 Cr.P.C. can only be made after a valid order has been passed under Section 145 Cr.P.C. If the proceedings under Section 145 are quashed without fresh proceedings being initiated, any subsequent attachment order under Section 146 is without legal basis and cannot be executed. The High Court''''s order directing implementation of such an attachment was quashed as it was found to be without basis and illegal.Checking relevance for Ranbir Singh VS Dalbir Singh...

Ranbir Singh VS Dalbir Singh - 2002 2 Supreme 484 : When a revisional court quashes an order of the magistrate under Section 145 and Section 146(1) of the CrPC, the effect is that the preliminary order under Section 145(1) and the subsequent order of attachment under Section 146(1) are set aside. The High Court, in such a case, may quash both orders if they are found to be an abuse of the process of law. However, the revisional court should not go beyond its limited scope by deciding questions of title or right of possession, as these are matters for the civil court. In such a scenario, the revisional court may grant leave to the parties to approach the civil court for an appropriate interim order, and the civil court should decide the matter without being influenced by the findings or observations made in the revisional judgment. The status quo regarding possession may be maintained temporarily until the civil court decides the matter.Checking relevance for Shanti Kumar Panda VS Shakuntala Devi...

Checking relevance for Satish Chander Ahuja VS Sneha Ahuja...

Satish Chander Ahuja VS Sneha Ahuja - 2020 6 Supreme 613 : If a revisional petition pertaining to an order of the Magistrate under Sections 145 and 146 of the Cr.P.C. is quashed by the revisional court, the effect is that the original order of the Magistrate is set aside and no longer has legal force. The revisional court''''s quashing of the order means the Magistrate''''s decision is nullified, and the party who was unsuccessful before the Magistrate is entitled to initiate proceedings before a competent court to establish its entitlement to possession. The order of the Magistrate, even if quashed, is only one piece of evidence at the interlocutory stage, and at the stage of final adjudication, the civil court will determine rights based on evidence led before it. The quashing of the Magistrate''''s order does not prevent the party from pursuing a civil suit for recovery of possession or determination of rights, and the civil court is not bound by the Magistrate''''s order, even if it was not quashed. The expression ''''until evicted therefrom in due course of law'''' in Section 145(6) Cr.P.C. means that the successful party before the Magistrate can only retain possession until evicted by a competent court, which may be a civil court, and the party can challenge the Magistrate''''s finding in such a court.Checking relevance for Siddeshwar Temple Trust Committee VS Malingaraya Temple Charitable Trust (R)...

Checking relevance for Ashok Kumar VS State of Uttarakhand...

Ashok Kumar VS State of Uttarakhand - 2012 8 Supreme 737 : When a revisional petition challenging an order of the Magistrate under Sections 145 and 146 of the CrPC is quashed by the revisional court, the order of attachment under Section 146(1) CrPC stands set aside. In the instant case, the revisional court held that the Magistrate had wrongly invoked Section 146(1) because the report under Section 145 indicated that one party (Ashok Kumar) was in actual possession of the property, and there was no emergency justifying attachment. The court explicitly set aside the SDM''''s order dated 25.11.2009 and the High Court''''s affirming order, holding that no grounds existed for attachment under Section 146 CrPC. The revisional court further directed the civil court to pass final orders on the interim injunction application, emphasizing that the revisional quashing of the attachment order effectively nullifies the attachment and restores the status quo ante until the civil suit is decided.Checking relevance for Harchand Ram VS State of Rajasthan...

Harchand Ram VS State of Rajasthan - 2022 0 Supreme(Raj) 2787 : When a revisional petition challenging an order of the magistrate under Sections 145 and 146 of the Cr.P.C. is quashed by the revisional court, the impugned orders passed by the lower courts (including the Executive Magistrate and the Additional District & Sessions Judge) are quashed and set aside. The revisional court may direct the release of property from attachment, hold the concerned officers accountable for abuse of process of law, and mandate that the Superintendent of Police depute a responsible officer to release the property within a specified time frame (e.g., 10 days). The quashing of the revisional order signifies that the lower courts acted in excess of jurisdiction, in a capricious or arbitrary manner, and in disregard of the process of law, particularly by failing to comply with the distinct procedural requirements of Sections 145(1) and 146(1) of the Cr.P.C., such as the need for separate orders and recording of satisfaction regarding emergent nature before attachment.

• Quashing of Revisional Petition Regarding Section 145/146 Orders - Main Points and Insights
• When a revisional court quashes an order under Sections 145 or 146 of Cr.P.C., it effectively nullifies the initial proceedings and orders passed by the Magistrate, including attachment or possession orders, as seen in multiple cases (e.g., SMT. MANJU TOMAR AND 2 ORS Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER - Allahabad, SMT. SUMAN Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER - Allahabad).
• The quashing leads to the dismissal of the proceedings, often resulting in the restoration of the status quo and the removal of restrictions or attachments imposed earlier.
• Several judgments emphasize that orders under Section 146(1) Cr.P.C. are considered substantive, non-interlocutory orders, and their quashing can significantly affect the rights of parties involved.
• Procedural irregularities, such as failure to follow the prescribed procedure under Section 145 (e.g., absence of preliminary order), can be grounds for quashing the proceedings, as highlighted in INDINDALL00000012973 and INDINDU00000001660.
• The effect of quashing is to prevent the enforcement of attachments or possession orders, thereby protecting the rights of the parties against potentially invalid or improperly passed orders.

• Courts also recognize that orders under Sections 145 and 146 are interlinked; quashing the revisional petition may result in the reinstatement of the original order unless it is found to be illegal or procedural errors are established.

• Analysis and Conclusion

• Quashing a revisional petition against an order under Sections 145 or 146 generally results in the preservation or reinstatement of the original order, unless procedural flaws or illegality are established.
• The primary effect is to prevent enforcement actions (like attachment or possession) that are found to be improper or irregular.
• The courts tend to scrutinize procedural compliance, and failure to follow statutory requirements can be a basis for quashing, as seen in multiple judgments.
• Overall, the quashing safeguards the rights of parties by ensuring that orders under Sections 145 and 146 are passed and maintained in accordance with legal procedures, and its effect is to nullify the impugned orders, restoring the pre-judgment position unless otherwise justified.

References:- ABDUL RAHMAN SON OF HAZI HUSSAIN KHAN(DECEASED) vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan- SMT. MANJU TOMAR AND 2 ORS Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER - Allahabad- SMT. SUMAN Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER - Allahabad- JAGE RAM BHATI Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS - 2023 Supreme(Online)(ALL) 1012 - 2023 Supreme(Online)(ALL) 1012- Dharmpal Singh vs Chandrapal Singh - Madhya Pradesh- Manoj Kumar vs State Of Uttarakhand & another - 2025 Supreme(Online)(UK) 2088 - 2025 Supreme(Online)(UK) 2088- DEVENDRA PAL SINGH Vs STATE OF U P AND 4 OTHERS - Allahabad- GOPI S/O BHOLU Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan- SAHUKAR vs State of U.P. AND 3 OTHERS - Allahabad