In Re: Shankar Sadashiv Katre

Beaman, J.—In our opinion the language of. 147 of the Criminal Procedure Code is plain enough. We think under that section that a Magistrate is restricted to inquiring into disputed rights of the use of " land and water ", including easements etc., over the same as expressly stated in the section. We cannot read into those words any more than they naturally contain, and we cannot hold that a ''privy'' is either ''land'' or ''water'' or that the use of it is an easement over the same. We think, therefore, that the Magistrate was in error in adopting the course he did. It is a very natural error considering that the complainant sought three reliefs, two of which could properly have been granted under the section. It is a very open question whether the third relief might not have been granted u/s 145, although the policy underlying this part of the law might supply objections to that course. However that may be, after thus expressing our opinion upon the state of the law, we think that this is a case in which we need not interfere in criminal revision. That is a matter entirely for the discretion of the Court, and here, we think, we should best use that discretion by leaving the Magistrate''s order where it is.