Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Mohd Salim vs State Of Rajasthan (2023:Rj-Jd:42748) on 7 December, 2023
Author: Praveer Bhatnagar
Bench: Praveer Bhatnagar
[2023:RJ-JD:42748]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 8345/2022
1. Mohd Salim S/o Sh. Babu Khan, Aged About 35 Years, B/c
Kayamkhani R/o Vill. Jodhdas Khurd, Teh. Riyan Badi,
Dist. Nagaur.
2. Mohd. Yusuf S/o Sh. Banne Khan, Aged About 32 Years,
B/c Kayamkhani R/o Vill. Jodhdas Khurd, Teh. Riyan Badi,
Dist. Nagaur.
3. Liyakat Ali S/o Sh. Mida Khan, Aged About 61 Years, B/c
Kayamkhani R/o Vill. Jodhdas Khurd, Teh. Riyan Badi,
Dist. Nagaur.
4. Israj Khan S/o Sh. Amir Khan, Aged About 48 Years, B/c
Kayamkhani R/o Vill. Jodhdas Khurd, Teh. Riyan Badi,
Dist. Nagaur.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Ajij Khan S/o Sh. Ajam Khan, B/c Kayamkhani R/o Vill.
Jodhdas Khurd, Teh. Riyan Badi, Dist. Nagaur.
3. Kanwar Ali S/o Sh. Ajam Khan, B/c Kayamkhani R/o Vill.
Jodhdas Khurd, Teh. Riyan Badi, Dist. Nagaur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : None present
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Saleem Khan, PP
Mr. O.P. Sangwa
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR
Order
07/12/2023
None appears on behalf of the petitioners.
Shri O.P. Sangwa, learned counsel appears on behalf of the
respondent Nos.2 and 3.
[2023:RJ-JD:42748] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-8345/2022]
This S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is
filed against the order dated 24.11.2022 passed by learned
Additional District Judge, Merta City, District Nagaur, whereby, the
revision petition filed on behalf of the petitioners was remanded
back to the trial court.
In the petition it is averred that the order dated 24.11.2022
passed by learned Additional District Judge, Merta, District Nagaur
is illegal, perverse, unjust and contrary to law. It is also averred
that learned SDM Riyan Badi after perusing the inquiry made by
SHO, Padukala passed the reasoned order dated 07.06.2021 and
appointed the SHO, Padukala as receiver over the disputed field. It
is further averred that appointment of receiver over the disputed
land was necessary to maintain the piece and tranquility at the
spot and in pursuant to the order dated 07.06.2021, possession of
the disputed field was taken over by the receiver. It is also averred
in the petition that serious question regarding possession was not
questioned and as per the settled law the learned SDM, Riyan Badi
passed the order dated 07.06.2021. It is also averred that
respondents are bent upon to take the possession of the disputed
property from the receiver, hence, the impugned order dated
24.11.2022 may be quashed and set aside and order dated
07.06.2021 passed by the learned SDM, Riyan Badi may kindly be
upheld.
It was contended before the revisional court by the
respondents that civil suit for declaration has already been filed
before the revenue court and revenue court has issued the
temporary injunction order. It was also contended that the said
complaint was filed just to harass the respondents and the
[2023:RJ-JD:42748] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-8345/2022]
concerned trial court passed an illegal order beyond its
jurisdiction. It was also contended that respondents are having
possession of the disputed land and petitioners were continuously
disputing their possession.
Learned reivsional court after relying upon the judgment of
Ashok Kumar Vs. Uttrakhand State: (2013), 3 SCC 366 arrived to
the conclusion that the disputed land was in possession of
respondents and there was no occasion for the trial court
appointing the receiver over the disputed land. Therefore, the
order of learned trial court was passed merely on the
apprehension. The learned revisional court thus, remanded the
matter to the learned trial court while setting aside the order
dated 07.06.2021 with the directions that both the parties shall be
provided opportunity of hearing and afterwards the trial court
would pass the order in accordance with law.
Thus, without commenting anything on the merits of the
case and looking to the fact that learned revisional court has
provided opportunity to both the parties to present their case
before the learned trial court, I do not find any infirmity in the
order passed by learned revisional court. The learned Trial Judge
shall not be bound by the observations, made by the Revisional
Court, regarding question of possession over the disputed land.
Accordingly, the present criminal misc. petition preferred
against the order dated 24.11.2022 is dismissed.
(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J
382-Suraj/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
