Konduri Yadagiri and Another vs Revenue Divisional Officer, Karimnagar and Others

C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J.—This writ petition is filed with the grievance that the proceedings initiated as far back as 21.6.2008 by respondent No. 1 u/s 145 Cr.P.C. are kept pending even though five years had elapsed. At the hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, on instructions, stated that as many as two murders have taken place in connection with the dispute over the immovable property in question and therefore in view of the continuance of the grave situation, the proceedings u/s 145 Cr.P.C. are kept pending.

Section 145 Cr.P.C. empowers the Executive Magistrates to initiate proceedings on the basis of the report of a Police Officer or upon other information that a dispute likely to cause breach of peace exists concerning any land or water or the boundaries thereof. Upon such initiation, the Executive Magistrate shall issue notices to both the parties and hold an enquiry as to which party is in possession of the property. Under clause (a) of sub-section (6) thereof, if the Magistrate decides that one of the parties was, or should under the proviso to sub-section (4) be treated as being, in such possession of the said subject, he shall issue an order declaring such party to be entitled to possession thereof until evicted in due course of law and forbidding all disturbance of such possession until such eviction. If the Executive Magistrate finds that any party was forcibly and wrongfully dispossessed within two months next before the date on which the report of the Police Officer or other information received by the Magistrate, he may restore possession to the party forcibly and wrongfully dispossessed.

The object behind enacting Section 145 Cr.P.C. is to prevent breach of peace on account of dispute over immovable property and protect the interests of the party who is found in possession of the property and restore possession to the party if forcibly dispossessed, within two months prior to the report of the police or other information received by the Executive Magistrate. However, the order passed under the said provision will be in force till such time as the aggrieved parry obtains appropriate orders from the competent Court of law.

The proceedings u/s 145 Cr.P.C. are transitory in nature enforceable against the party who intends to dispossess the other party in possession of the immovable property or who unlawfully dispossessed a party in possession. Proceedings were initiated in the present case under the said provision as far back as 21.6.2008. More than five years have elapsed since then. Respondent No. 1 cannot continue the said proceedings forever and he has to pass a final order as envisaged under subsection (6) of Section 145 Cr.P.C. sooner or later. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent No. 1 to conclude the proceedings, pass a final order and communicate the same to the petitioners and any other party who is interested in the property in question, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order. As a sequel to the disposal of the writ petition, WPMP Nos. 12509 and 12510/2013 filed for interim reliefs shall stand disposed of as infructuous.