JUDGMENT Vinod Prasad, J.
1. The applicants have filed this revision aggrieved by an order dated 11.10.06 passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Handia in Case No. 44 of 2006 Gauri Shanker v. Revati Raman and Ors. under Section 145 Cr. P.C. By the impugned order, the S.D.M. concerned has passed an order under Section 146(1) Cr. P.C. for attachment.
2. Learned Counsel for the revisionists contended that the Magistrate has committed an illegality by passing the impugned order. He further contended that the there was no justification for the trial court to pass such an order.
3. In my view the order under Section 146(1) Cr.P.C. is an interlocutory order and revision is not maintainable against such an order being barred by Section 397(2) Cr.P.C. The order under Section 146(1) Cr.P.C. is only an enabling provision giving power to the Magistrate concerned, during the pendency of the proceeding under Section 145, to attached the property so as to obliterate apprehension breach of peace during the pendency of 145 proceeding itself. By passing an order under Section 146(1) Cr.P.C. no proceeding is finalized. It is only an interim order which is in the nature of a preventive measure. The court concerned is required to decide the question of possession two months prior to the passing of the preliminary order and inter (sic) deciding the said question of possession, the power under Section 146(1) Cr.P.C. has been conferred, by the statue 1 on the Magistrate for the. simple reason that during the pendency of the determination on the question of possession the parties should not take undue advantage and commit breach of peace. I may remind that 145(1) Cr. P.C. proceeding is also started to obliterated apprehension of breach of peace and no change in the property in question should be permitted to be done meanwhile. The very phraseology in which Section 146(1) Cr.P.C. is enacted by the legislature indicates that an order under Section 146(1) Cr.P.C. is an interim order and the said order is not covered within the word "proceeding" as is contemplated under Section 397 Cr.P.C. which gives power to this Court and to the Sessions Judge to revised any order or any proceeding of the lower Court.
4. For clarity of understanding Section 146 Cr.P.C. is quoted below:
146. Power to attach subject of dispute and to appoint receiver.-(1) If the Magistrate at any lime after making the order under Sub-section (1) of Section 145 considers the case to be one of emergency, or if he decides that none of the parties was then hi such possession as is referred to hi Section 145, or if he is unable to satisfy himself as to which of them was then hi such possession of the subject of dispute, he may attach the subject of dispute until a competent Court has determine the rights of the parties thereto with regard to the person entitled to the possession thereof:
Provided that such Magistrate may withdraw the attachment at any time if he is satisfied that there is no longer any likelihood of breach of the peace with regard to the subject of dispute.
(2) When the Magistrate attaches the subject of dispute, he may. if no receiver in relation to such subject of dispute has been appointed by any Civil Court, make such arrangement as he considers proper for looking after the property or if he things fit, appoint a receiver thereof, who shall have, subject to the control of the Magistrate, all the powers of a receiver appointed under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908):
Provided that hi the event of a receiver being subsequently appointed hi relation to the subject of dispute by any Civil Court, the Magistrate-
(a) shall order the receiver appointed by him to hand over the possession of the subject of dispute to the receiver appointed by the Civil Court and shall thereafter discharge the receiver appointed by him;
(b) may make such other incidental or consequential orders as may be just.
5. From the bare reading of the said statutory provision, it is clear that if at the time of passing an order under Section 145(1) Cr.P.C.or after making of the aforesaid order if the Magistrate considers "the case to be one of emergency" or "if he decides that non of the parties was then in possession as is referred to under Section 145" or "if he is unable to satisfy himself as to which of them was then in possession of the subject of dispute" he can pass an order under Section 146(1) Cr.P.C. These three conditions are sine quo non for exercising power under Section 146(1) Cr.P.C.
6. Suffice to it to say that two subsequent conditions do not apply on the facts of the present case. So far as the first condition is concerned, the same is related to a case of emergency. It is a discretionary power of the Magistrate based on his satisfaction on the tangible material that emergency exist for passing of an order under Section 146(1) Cr.P.C.. The said order can be withdrawn, annulled or modified by him at any subsequent stage of proceeding on being satisfied that the emergency no longer exists.
7. In view of the above, the order under Section 146(1) Cr.P.C. can be bracketed only within the purview of an order which is interlocutory in nature and not as an order which is final. Hence revision under Section 397(2) Cr.P.C. is barred against such an order.
8. This revision, therefore, is not maintainable and is hereby dismissed.