Kerala High Court
R Manikuttan vs K.S Anilkumar on 20 February, 2025
Author: Kauser Edappagath
Bench: Kauser Edappagath
2025:KER:14846
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
THURSDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 1ST PHALGUNA, 1946
CRL.REV.PET NO. 1243 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 28-05-2024 IN RDODVM/403/2024-B1
REVISION PETITIONER/8TH RESPONDENT:
P T AJAYAN NAIR
AGED 58 YEARS
SON OF PARAMESWARAN NAIR, MANGALATH HOUSE
BALAGRAM PO, KUMARAKAMMETT
THE SECRETARY, NSS HIGH RANGE TALUK UNION,
NEDUNKANDAM PO IDUKKI, PIN - 685553
BY ADVS.
ANIL D.KARTHA
ANANTHAKRISHNAN A. KARTHA
ANANTHASANKAR A. KARTHA
RESPONDENTS/STATE AND RESPONDENTS 1 TO 7:
1 THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE DEVIKULAM,
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE DEVIKULAM,
PAINAVU, PIN - 685613
2 R MANIKUTTAN
AGED 63 YEARS
SON OF RAGHAVAN NAIR AMAYAR,
VANDAMNEDU VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK
IDUKKI,, PIN - 685554
2025:KER:14846
CRL.REV.PET NOS.1243 OF 2024 &
621 OF 2024
2
3 RAVINDRAN
AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONERS
SON OF GOPALAN NAIR,
PUTHUPPALLU KUNNEL HOUSE THANGAMANI,
NEDUNGANDAM PO, IDUKKI, PIN - 685553
4 USHA BALAN
AGE AND HUSBANDS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE
PETITIONERS MELIECKAL HOUSE, KATTAPANA
THE SECRETARY, VANITHA UNION NSS HIGH RANGE
TALUK UNION NEDUNKANDAM PO, IDUKKI,
PIN - 685553
5 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
6 K S ANIL KUMAR
AGED 48 YEARS
SON OF K G SIVARAMA PILLAI, KOTTAYIL,
NARIYANOARA THE CHAIRMAN, ADHOC COMMITTEE
NSS HIGH RANGE TALUK UNION, NEDUNKANDAM PO
IDUKKI, PIN - 685553
BY ADVS.
SREEJA V., SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
DINESH R.SHENOY
SHANTHIPRIYA D. SHENOY(K/4066/2024)
R.P. PRADEEP FOR R6
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 20.02.2025, ALONG WITH CRL.REV.PET.621/2024,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:14846
CRL.REV.PET NOS.1243 OF 2024 &
621 OF 2024
3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
THURSDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 1ST PHALGUNA, 1946
CRL.REV.PET NO. 621 OF 2024
CRIME NO.652/2022 OF NEDUMKANDAM POLICE STATION, IDUKKI
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 28-05-2024 IN RDODVM/403/2024-B1
REVISION PETITIONER/1ST RESPONDENT:
R MANIKUTTAN
AGED 63 YEARS
S/O RAGHAVAN NAIR, SHANTHIVILA,
AMAYAR, VANDANMEDU VILLAGE,
UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK, IDUKKI.,
PIN - 685554
BY ADVS.
DINESH R.SHENOY
SILESH S. PRABHU
JOMOL PIUS
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS 1 & 2, RESPONDENTS 2 & 3 & STATE:
1 K.S ANILKUMAR
AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE
PETITIONER, KOTTAYIL, NARIYANPARA,
CHAIRMAN ADHOC COMMITTEE,
HIGH RANGE TALUK UNION, NEDUNGANDAM P O.,
PIN - 685553
2025:KER:14846
CRL.REV.PET NOS.1243 OF 2024 &
621 OF 2024
4
2 P.T AJAYAN NAIR
AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,
S/O PARAMESWARAN NAIR, MANGALATH HOUSE,
BALAGRAM P.O., KUMARAKAMMETT,
SECRETARY, ADHOC COMMITTEE,
NSS HIGH RANGE TALUK UNION,.
NEDUNGANDAM P.O., PIN - 685553
3 RAVINDRAN
AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,
S/O GOPALAN NAIR, PUTHUPPALLY KALLUNNEL (HOUSE),
THANGAMANI,NEDUNGANDAM P.O., P
IN - 685553
4 USHA BALAN
AGE AND HUSBAND'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE
PETITIONER, MALIECKAL, KATTAPANA,
SECRETARY, VANITHA UNION NSS HIGH RANGE
TALUK UNION, NEDUNGANDAM P O., PIN - 685553
5 VILLAGE OFFICER
KALKOONTHAL,NEDUNGANDAM P.O,
IDUKKI., PIN - 685553
6 SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE
DEVIKULAM,REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
DEVIKULAM,PAINAVU., PIN - 685613
BY ADVS.
R.T.PRADEEP
ANIL D.KARTHA
ANANTHAKRISHNAN A. KARTHA(K/001032/2016)
K.T.SEBASTIAN(K/1079/2001)
P.BIJIMON
M.BINDUDAS
ABIN P. SHAJU
NIRANJAN T. PRADEEP
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 20.02.2025, ALONG WITH CRL.REV.PET.1243/2024,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:14846
CRL.REV.PET NOS.1243 OF 2024 &
621 OF 2024
5
ORDER
[Crl.Rev.Pet. Nos.1243/2024 & 621/2024]
The order passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate,
Devikulam (for short, the Executive Magistrate) dated
28.05.2024 in RDODVM/403/2024-B1 (impugned order)
under Section 146(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.PC)
is under challenge in these revision petitions.
2. The subject matter of the impugned order is a
building where Highrange Taluk NSS Union Nedumkandam
(for short 'the office building') functioned. The dispute arose
between the elected office bearers of the NSS unit and the
adhoc committee of the unit which led to litigation before
the civil court. While so, the Station House Officer,
Nedumkandam Police Station on 29.03.2024 took over the
possession of the office building, invoking Section 67 of the
Kerala Police Act (for short 'the KP Act') holding that there is
possibility for imminent riot or great disturbance of peace
due to the dispute between the two factions of the NSS unit.
2025:KER:14846
CRL.REV.PET NOS.1243 OF 2024 &
621 OF 2024
Annexure A4 order was passed for a period of twenty four
hours. Later on, the District Magistrate/District Collector,
Idukki, extended the said order for a period of sixty days in
terms of the 2nd proviso to Section 67 of the KP Act on
30.03.2024. Thereafter, on 22.05.2024, the petitioners in
Crl.Rev.Pet. No.621/2024 gave a representation to the
District Magistrate/District Collector, Idukki, to restore the
possession of the office building to them. The District
Collector referred the issue to the Executive Magistrate, who
gave Annexure A7 communication to the representatives of
the elected committee as well as to the adhoc committee.
Both parties submitted their statements before the
Executive Magistrate along with all documents. The
statement of the witnesses were also recorded by the
Executive Magistrate. Thereafter, the Executive Magistrate
passed the impugned order under Section 146(2) of the
Cr.P.C, taking over the possession of the office building and
handing it over to the Village Officer, Kalkunthal. The said
order is under challenge by the elected committee as well as
2025:KER:14846
CRL.REV.PET NOS.1243 OF 2024 &
621 OF 2024
the Taluk Union Secretary of the NSS unit. Crl.Rev.Pet.
No.1243/2024 has been filed by the Taluk Union Secretary of
the NSS and Crl.Rev.Pet. No.621/2024 has been filed by the
elected committee.
3. I have heard Sri. Dinesh R. Shenoy, the learned
counsel for the petitioner in Crl.Rev.Pet. No.621/2024, Sri.
Anil D. Kartha, the learned counsel for the petitioner in
Crl.Rev.Pet. No.1243/2024, Sri. R. T. Pradeep, the learned
counsel representing the Chairman of the adhoc committee
as well as Smt. Sreeja V., the learned Senior Public
Prosecutor.
4. Sections 145 and 146 of Cr.PC deals with the
procedure where dispute concerning land or water is likely
to cause breach of peace. Section 145(1) of Cr.PC provides
that whenever an Executive Magistrate is satisfied from a
report of a police officer or upon other information that a
dispute likely to cause a breach of the peace exists
concerning any land or water or the boundaries thereof,
within his local jurisdiction, he shall make an order in writing,
2025:KER:14846
CRL.REV.PET NOS.1243 OF 2024 &
621 OF 2024
stating the grounds of his being so satisfied, and requiring
the parties concerned in such dispute to attend his Court in
person or by pleader, on a specified date and time, and to
put in written statements of their respective claims as
respects the fact of actual possession of the subject of
dispute. Here is a case where the Executive Magistrate was
satisfied that on account of the disputes between two
factions of NSS Union there was likely to cause breach of
peace and accordingly an order in writing was issued to both
sides requiring them to attend his court. In response to the
said notice, both sides appeared, submitted their response
and produced documents in support of their claim. It
appears that both sides put forward a claim that they were
in actual possession of the office building. The Executive
Magistrate under the exercise of power under Section 145 of
Cr.PC is supposed to look into the actual possession of the
subject of the dispute only. Once parties appeared before
the Executive Magistrate in response to the order issued
under Section 145(1) of Cr.PC, necessarily the Executive
2025:KER:14846
CRL.REV.PET NOS.1243 OF 2024 &
621 OF 2024
Magistrate has to proceed under sub-section (4). Section
145(4) of Cr.PC says that after the appearance of the parties
in response to an order under sub-section (1) and on receipt
of the written statements of the respective claims of the
parties with respect to the actual possession of the subject
of dispute, the Executive Magistrate without reference of the
merits or the claims of any of the parties to right to possess
the subject of dispute, peruse the statements put in by the
parties, hear them, receive all evidence as produced by
them, take further evidence, if any, and if possible, decide
whether any and which of the parties was at the time of
order made by him under sub-section (1) in possession of
subject of the dispute. The proviso to sub-section (4) says
that if it appears to the Magistrate that any party has been
forcibly and wrongfully dispossessed within two months next
before the date on which the information was received by
him or after that date and before the date of his order under
sub-section (1), he may treat the parties so dispossessed as
if that party had been in possession on the date of his order
2025:KER:14846
CRL.REV.PET NOS.1243 OF 2024 &
621 OF 2024
under sub-section (1). Thus, it is mandatory on the part of
the Executive Magistrate while exercising the power under
Section 145 of Cr.PC to decide as to who was in actual
possession of the subject of dispute at the time of the order
made by him under sub-section (1). A perusal of the
impugned order would show that the Executive Magistrate
did not go into sub-section (4) at all. He did not decide as to
who was in possession of the subject of the dispute as on
the date of his order under Section 145(1) of Cr.PC. Instead,
he passed the impugned order invoking Section 146(2) of
Cr.PC taking possession of the building and handing it over
to the Village Officer. The impugned order passed by the
Executive Magistrate without recourse to Section 145(4) of
Cr.PC is against the statutory scheme of Sections 145 and
146 of Cr.PC. Hence, the impugned order cannot be
sustained. Accordingly, it is set aside. The Executive
Magistrate is directed to consider the matter afresh. He shall
consider the statements as well as the documentary and
oral evidence already given by both parties, take a decision
2025:KER:14846
CRL.REV.PET NOS.1243 OF 2024 &
621 OF 2024
as to the possession of the subject of the dispute as on the
date of the order passed by him under Section 145(1) of
Cr.PC and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
Both sides are free to adduce further evidence, if any. The
Executive Magistrate shall take a decision within a period of
two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment. Till fresh order is passed by the Executive
Magistrate, the possession of the building shall be retained
with the Village Officer, Kalkunthal.
The Criminal Revision Petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
JUDGE
BR
2025:KER:14846
CRL.REV.PET NOS.1243 OF 2024 &
621 OF 2024
APPENDIX OF CRL.REV.PET 1243/2024
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES
Annexure I A TRUE COPY OF THE SANGHADANA SKAKHA
NIBANDHANAKAL OF THE NSS
Annexure II A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON BYLAW OF TALUK
UNION
Annexure III A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE
REGISTRAR OF KARAYOGAMS DATED 08-06-2022
BEARING NO. TU(C) 2891/2033/2022
Annexure IV A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS BEARING
NO. TU(C)/2891/727/2023 DATED 07-03-2023
Annexure V A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED
29-03-2024 PREFERRED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT
Annexure VI A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED
29-03-2024 ISSUED BY THE NEDUNKANDAM
POLICE STATION
Annexure VII A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
28-05-2024 BEARING NO. RDODVM/403/2024-
B1 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: NIL
2025:KER:14846
CRL.REV.PET NOS.1243 OF 2024 &
621 OF 2024
APPENDIX OF CRL.REV.PET 621/2024
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PLAINT IN
OS.NO.46/22, SUB COURT, KATTAPANA DATED
10/6/2022.
Annexure A2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF COMMISSION REPORT
DATED 13/6/2022 SUBMITTED BY ADVOCATE
COMMISSIONER, JIBY SEBASTIAN IN
IA.NO.1/22 IN OS.NO. 46/2022, SUB COURT,
KATTAPANA.
Annexure A3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF COMPLAINT DATED
29/3/2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
AND OTHERS BEFORE THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR
OF POLICE, NEDUNGANDAM POLICE STATION
TOGETHER WITH RECEIPT.
Annexure A4 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED
29/3/2024 ISSUED BY THE STATION HOUSE
OFFICER, NEDUNGANDAM POLICE STATION.
Annexure A5 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF ORDER DATED 30.3.2024
ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
IDUKKI.
Annexure A6 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED
22/5/24 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE DISTRICT
COLLECTOR, IDUKKI.
Annexure A7 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF NOTICE DATED 25/5/2024
ISSUED BY THE 6 RESPONDENT.
Annexure A8 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF ADDITIONAL STATEMENT
IN FILE NO.RDO DVM/403/2024 - B1 DATED
NIL FILED BEFORE THE 6TH RESPONDENT.
Annexure A9 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
DATED 12/3/2024 SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND
2025:KER:14846
CRL.REV.PET NOS.1243 OF 2024 &
621 OF 2024
RESPONDENT BEFORE THE DISTRICT POLICE
CHIEF.
Exhibit A10 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF DEPOSITION OF THE 2ND
RESPONDENT BEFORE THE SUB DIVISIONAL
MAGISTRATE.
Annexure A11 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE SUB DIVISIONAL
MAGISTRATE.
Annexure A12 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF LETTER DATED 17/4/2024
ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT.
Annexure A13 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF LETTER DATED 17/1/24
ISSUED BY RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2, TO THE
SECRETARY, NSS KARAYOGAM, KOMBAYAR.
Annexure A14 ORIGINAL ORDER NO.RDO DVM/402/2024 - B1
DATED 28/5/2024 ISSUED BY THE 6TH
RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: NIL
