Sudhir Kumar Patodia vs Unknown
2023 Latest Caselaw 926 Cal

03.2.2023

SB Ct. No.236

CRR 907 of 2011 CRAN 3 of 2012

In the matter of : Sudhir Kumar Patodia

Mr. N. P. Agarwala Mr. P. Bose, ... For the State

This criminal revision challenges the order passed by the

learned Additional Sessions Judge, 9th F.T.C., Bichar Bhawan,

Calcutta in Criminal Revision No. 174 of 2010 on 04.12.2010

which was filed assailing the order of learned Executive Magistrate

passed in a proceeding initially registered under Section 144 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure subsequently converted into a

proceeding under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Learned Trial Court, having considered the materials made

available before him was pleased to dismiss the criminal revision.

Fact of the case in short is that, an application under

Section 144 (2) of Cr.P.C. was taken out by the petitioner Sri

Sudhir Kumar Patodia against his own brothers and another

person which was registered as M-152 of 2009. Learned Executive

Magistrate upon considering the police report was pleased to treat

this application under Section 145 (1) of the Cr.P.C. which was the

root of cause dissatisfaction of the petitioner. The Section 145 (1)

of the Cr.P.C. envisages that an Executive Magistrate whenever is

satisfied either from a report of a police officer or upon other

information that a dispute is likely to cause a breach of peace

concerning any land or water or boundaries etc., he shall make an order in writing. The petition of complaint taken out before the

learned Executive Magistrate unerringly set aside the dispute over

the property among the brothers. Therefore, the learned Additional

Sessions Judge, 9th Fast Track Court, Bichar Bhawan, Calcutta

refused to interfere with the order passed by the learned Executive

Magistrate and in my opinion the impugned judgment of the

learned Additional Sessions Judge, 9th Fast Track Court, Bichar

Bhawan, Calcutta does not warrant any interference.

Accordingly the revisional application is bereft of merit and

is thus dismissed.

With this observation the revisional application along with

CRAN 3 of 2012 is disposed of.

Let a copy of this order be sent to the learned Trial Court for

information and necessary action.

(Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury, J.)