Vikram Singh vs A.D.M.(E) and Others

P.N. Bakshi, J.—This application u/s 482, Code of Criminal Procedure arises in the following circumstances :

Proceedings u/s 145, Code of Criminal Procedure were initially decided by the Magistrate on 6-12-1971. The Magistrate held that Dwarika Prasad and others were in possession of plot No. 94 on the date of the preliminary order. He forbade Vikram Singh from interfering with the possession of Dwarika Prasad until the latter was evicted in due course of law.

It appears that after the conclusion of these proceedings Dwarika Prasad began raising a wall on the said land. This was objected by Vikram Singh who filed an application before the Magistrate on the allegations that some unsocial elements were trying to raise constructions on this plot. He prayed for police help. A report was called for by the Magistrate. After a perusal of that report the Magistrate came to the conclusion that proceedings under '' Section 145 Code of Criminal Procedure had already ended in favour of Dwarika Prasad and Vikram Singh was not entitled to police help.

It may be mentioned here that Dwarika also made an application to the Magistrate praying that police help may be given to him so that he may complete the construction of the wall on plot No. 94 of which he was the owner in pos-; session. It appears that on 20-9-1975, the S.D.M. passed an order giving police help to Dwarika. Aggrieved by this order, an application was moved by Vikram Singh before the A.D.M. (E) Varanasi praying that the order of the S D.M. dated 30-9-1975 be quashed. Vikram Singh succeeded in obtaining an interim order of stay from the A.D.M. (E) staying the operation of the order of the S.D.M. A report was called for by the A.D.M and ultimately on 24-11-1975, the interim order was vacated and A.D.M. (E) directed that Dwarika Prasad and others should be allowed to continue the constructions over the land in question and that Vikram Singh if he had any rights, to seek his remedy in a civil Court. Aggrieved thereby, the present application has been filed.

At the time of admission, a report was called for by this Court. That report, it appears has been sent to this Court but unfortunately, the office has been consistently reporting that the report of the Magistrate has not been received. learned Counsel for the opposite parties Dwarika Prasad has filed a certified copy of the report dated 10-3-1976 today. From a perusal thereof, it is clear that the orders which have been passed by the Magistrate concerned as well as by the Additional District Magistrate (E) Varanasi are administrative orders rendering police aid to Dwarika Prasad who has been finally held to be in possession of plot No. 94. These orders are not judicial orders but administrative orders. The Petitioner is thus not entitled to any relief for quashing these orders.

Moreover, on merits also the Petitioner has no case. He has already lost in proceedings u/s 145, Code of Criminal Procedure as early as 1971. He was directed by the Magistrate to go to a Civil Court for adjudication of his rights if he desired the eviction of Dwarika Prasad. Dwarika Prasad was held to be in possession of plot No. 94 on the date of the preliminary order passed in proceedings u/s 145 Code of Criminal Procedure. It therefore, does not lie in the mouth of the applicant to say that he is in possession without taking recourse to civil proceedings as directed by the Magistrate. There can be no doubt that the applicant Vikram Singh having lost in proceedings u/s 145 Code of Criminal Procedure is causing unnecessary harassment by obstructing construction of the wall on plot No. 94 by the rightful person i.e. Dwarika Prasad and Rameshwar. He is thus not entitled to any relief in the interest of justice.

For the reasons given above, I find no merit in this application. It is hereby rejected.