Balwinder Singh vs State of Punjab

S.S. Nijjar, J.

It is the claim of the petitioners that the parties are cosharers in land in question and, therefore, no proceedings under Sections 145 and 146 of the Code of Criminal Procedure could have been initiated. Apart from that, it is not disputed that the second civil suit is pending with regard to the same land. The dispute, however, raised by Mr. Mukhtiar Singh is to the effect that the suit which has been filed by the petitioners pertains only to construction of building and does not relate to landin dispute. Mr. Punia, on the other hand, submitted that the suit filed by the petitioners pertains very much to the landinquestion. He further submits that the respondents are wrongly claiming to be tenants on the suit land only to defeat the present petition. He has pointed out to the civil suit filed by the respondents, attached as Annexure P.8 to the petition, to show that the respondents have already taken necessary proceedings to protect their possession over the land.

I have heard the counsel for the parties at length.

A perusal of the record shows that the case involves intricate disputed question of fact. Even the possession of the respective parties cannot be said to be clearly established on the basis of the pleadings. This can only be done through the Civil Court by taking appropriate remedy. The proceedings under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are only inappropriate on the facts and circumstances of the present case.

In view of the above, the petition is allowed. The proceedings pending before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Malerkotlarespondent No. 2 as also the consequential impugned orders passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Malerkotla are hereby quashed. No costs.