Lakhi Ram and Another vs Hari Singh and Another

Rekha Mittal, J.—Through the present petition filed u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for brevity "the Code"), the petitioners pray for quashing order dated 29.9.2011 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Charkhi Dadri and order dated 7.3.2013 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Sessions Judge, Bhiwani whereby the petition filed by respondent Hari Singh u/s 133 of the Code has been allowed and the revision petition filed by the petitioners has been dismissed. Counsel for the petitioners submits that Hari Singh-respondent submitted an application to the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Charkhi Dadri that the petitioners have encroached upon a public passage belonging to the Gram Panchayat comprising Khasra Nos. 103, 120 and 135 situated within the revenue estate of village Lambra Sub Tehsil Bondkalan Tehsil Charkhi Dadri, District Bhiwani. It is argued that the Courts below have erred in allowing the application and ordering ejectment of the petitioners from land measuring 05 marlas which belong to them. It is further submitted that the impugned orders are illegal and have been passed in violation of the provisions of law.

I have heard counsel for the petitioners, perused the case file and the impugned orders passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Charkhi Dadri and the revisional Court.

Before adverting to the merits of the controversy, it is pertinent to mention at the out set, that the petitioners have already availed remedy of revision to assail the order passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate and was unsuccessful. The jurisdiction u/s 482 of the Code is extra ordinary in nature and is to be used sparingly where the Court prima facie finds that the proceedings or orders passed by the subordinate authorities amount to abuse and misuse of process of law or have resulted in miscarriage of justice. The present petitioners have failed to substantiate their plea that the orders passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Charkhi Dadri and the Revisional Court have resulted in miscarriage of justice.

A perusal of order passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate would reveal that demarcation of the disputed khasra numbers was got conducted during pendency of the proceedings. Both the parties were permitted to lead evidence in support of their respective claims. The petitioners also produced demarcation reports in support of their claim. It was noticed by the Magistrate that as per demarcation got conducted by the petitioners, area of khasra Nos. 103, 120 and 135 was not the subject matter of demarcation, therefore, the said report was rightly discarded by the authority. The revisional Court, on a detailed consideration of the entire matter in right perspective recorded a finding that there is no error much less illegality in the order passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate as would call for interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction. I do not find any error, infirmity much less illegality in the orders impugned nor the orders are based upon misreading or mis-appreciation of evidence led on record. In view of what has been discussed herein above, the petition is dismissed in limine.