IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5464/2018 BETWEEN:
1. M.C. BELLIAPPA AGED 68 YEARS S/O LATE CHENGAPPA NOKYA VILLAGE THITHIMATHI POST VIRAJPET TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 254.
2. SMT. PONNAMMA AGED 63 YEARS W/O M.C. BELLIAPPA NOKYA VILLAGE THITHIMATHI POST VIRAJPET TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 254.
(BY SMT. SOPHIA ON BEHALF OF SRI. KIRAN V RON., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE PONNAMPET POLICE STATION PONNAMPET TOWN AND POST VIRAJPET TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 216.
2. THE TAHSILDAR VIRAJPET TALUK, VIRAJPET KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 218.
... PETITIONERS 3. M.C. DEVAIAH S/O LATE CHENGAPPA AGED 63 YEARS NOKYA VILLAGE, THITHIMATHI POST VIRAJPET TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 254.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S. RACHAIAH., HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE AND QUASH THE ORDER DATED:23.02.2018, PASSED BY THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE-MADIKERI, SITTING AT VIRAJPET IN CRL.RP NO.14/2015 ANNEXURE- A AND UPHOLD THE ORDER DATED:30.06.2015, PASSED IN MAG:CR.PC SECTION/145:04:14-15 BY THE THASILDAR, THE 2ND RESPONDENT AT ANNEXURE-D.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Heard Smt. Sophia, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri.Kiran V. Ron for petitioners and Sri.S.Rachaiah, learned HCGP appearing for first respondent-State.
2. Order dated 23.02.2018 passed by II Addl.
District and Sessions Judge, Virajpet, in exercise of power vested under Section 399 of Cr.P.C. setting aside the order dated 30.06.2015 passed by Executive Magistrate/Tahsildar, Virajpet, is called in question.
3. The Taluka Executive Magistrate, Virajpet, in the proceedings initiated under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. had passed an order on 30.06.2015 on the basis of report of surveyors and has opined that land bearing Sy.Nos.159/2 and 159/2B are in the ownership of petitioner and it belongs to him. Said order came to be challenged by the rival claimant in revision petition and learned Revisional Judge after noticing rival contentions and on perusal of entire records, which had culminated in passing the order dated 30.06.2015, has held that when the matter is seized before the Civil Court, very initiation of proceedings under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. would not be justified unless the situation warrants. In other words, it has been held that an order under sub-section (1) of Section 145 of Cr.P.C. can be passed by the Taluka Executive Magistrate on being satisfied with the dispute concerning to land results in breach of peace in the area/village. Mere pendency of civil dispute in respect of immovable property does not empower the Magistrate to pass an order under Section 145 of Cr.P.C.
4. In fact, in the instant case, Taluka Executive Magistrate instead of resorting to such proceedings or adopting the procedure to maintain peace, has proceeded to declare that petitioner herein to be the owner of property and as such Revisional Court has rightly held that said order passed by the Taluka Executive Magistrate is with total non application of mind and had been passed in a mechanical manner. As rightly observed by the learned Sessions Judge, bare reading of order dated 30.06.2015 would disclose that Taluka Executive Magistrate has declared petitioner to be the owner and in possession of land bearing Sy.Nos.159/2 and 159/2B of Nokya Village, which order could have been passed in the Civil Court and not by the Executive Magistrate. Hence, this Court finds there is no good ground to entertain this petition. Hence, petition stands rejected. However, it is made clear that in the event of Taluka Magistrate apprehending any breach of peace, he would be at liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings at appropriate stage in accordance with law, if he so feels.
SD/- JUDGE DR