High Courts(1994) 09 AHC CK 0071

Jameel Khan vs Mujammil Khan & Anr.

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 19 September 1994

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.K.Jain, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Revision No. 108 of 1992

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 274 words

S.K. Jain, J.—Jameel Khan, hereinafter referred to as the first party, filed Civil Suit No. 314 of 1989 against the respondents on 14.8.1989. On 16.8.1989 an application under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151, Cr. P.C. was filed in that suit. It was dismissed. At the instance of the first party proceedings under Section 145, Cr. P.C. were initiated on 22.8.1989.

2.

The learned Magistrate took cognizance of the matter and vide his order dated 22.10.1991 directed the second party not to interfere with the possession of the first party/Feeling aggrieved from the said order, the second party filed Criminal Revision No. 164 of 1991. It was allowed by the learned Sessions Judge, Fatehpur and the order dated 22.10.1991 passed by the learned Magistrate was set aside and the proceedings under Sect on 145/146, Cr. P.C. were quashed. It is that order of December 23,1991 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Fatehpur which has been challenged by the first party Jameel Khan in this criminal revision petition and which requires my scrutiny of its attainability.

3.

I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and with their help perused the judgment. Pendency of above mentioned civil suit between the parties and rejection of the application seeking ad interim injunction is admitted on both ends. Now it is firmly settled that during the pendency of civil suit the proceedings under Section 145/146 cannot proceed. This proposition of law is also not disputed by the Counsel for the parties. That being so the present revision petition deserves to be dismissed.

4.

This revision petition is, therefore, dismissed in limine.

Revision dismissed.