Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Dulla Vs. the State Through Dwarka and ors.

Dulla vs The State Through Dwarka and ors.

Disposition Reference accepted Court Allahabad Decided Jul 21, 1952
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/461850

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Allahabad High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Criminal Ref. No. 17 of 1952
Subject
Criminal
Disposition
Reference accepted

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal - proceedings by Magistrate - Section 145 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 - Order passed by Sub-Divisional Magistrate under Section 145 - no finding in the case showed there could be breach of peace - Order recommended for being set aside by Additional Sessions Judge - held, Order be set aside as a Magistr...

Key legal issue
Criminal
Outcome / disposition
Reference accepted
Acts & sections
Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1898 - Sections 145

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Dulla

Advocate Farooq Hasan, Adv.

Respondent

The State Through Dwarka and ors.

Legal References

Reported In
AIR1953All341

Excerpt

criminal - proceedings by magistrate - section 145 of criminal procedure code, 1898 - order passed by sub-divisional magistrate under section 145 - no finding in the case showed there could be breach of peace - order recommended for being set aside by additional sessions judge - held, order be set aside as a magistrate has no jurisdiction to proceed under section 145 if there is absence of breach of peace. - .....the said order. the revisional court has made a reference to this court for setting aside the impugned order. i am of opinion that this reference must be accepted.4. the order of the learned magistrate shows that there was nothing on the record which could suggest that there was any danger of a breach of the peace. under the circumstances the learned magistrate found that there was no likelihood of a breach of the peace in respect of the plot. in spite of it the trial court went through the entire gamut of procedure prescribed by section 145, criminal p. c., for the purpose of determining in whose favour the release order should be passed.5. the procedure adopted is unwarranted by law. once it is found that there is no danger of a breach of the peace, the foundation for action under section 145, criminal p. c., disappears. the magistrate has no jurisdiction to proceed further and must immediately stay his hand. ho cannot convert himself into a civil court and go on to decide the case on merits or to givo a finding either on the question of title or on the question of possession for any ulterior or subsidiary pur-pose. the only course open to him is to cancel his initial order and to quash all proceedings under section 145, criminal p. c.6. i accordingly accept the recommendation of the learned additional sessions judge of unnao, set aside the order and direct that the entire proceedings under section 145, criminal p. c., shall stand cancelled.

Full Judgment

ORDER

Beg, J.

1. This is a reference by the learnedAdditional Sessions Judge of Unnao recommending that the order passed by Sri Niaz Ulla, bub-Divisional Magistrate, Hasanganj Unnao, under Section 145, Criminal P. C., directing that the disputed property be released in favour of the opposite parties Dwarka and others be set aside.

2. It would appear that the applicant Dulia had presented an application under Section 145, Criminal P. C., against Dwarka and others in respect of plot no. 138 detailed therein alleging that the plot in question was his tenancy land and that he was in possession of it. After calling for a police report the trial Court passed an order on 13-11-1950, that the said plot and the crop standing thereon be attached. Both the parties were called upon to file written statements in the case. Each of them claimed to be the tenant in possession of the plot in dispute. They were required to produce evidence in support of their case.

3. The learned Magistrate minutely examined the evidence adduced by each of the parties and as a result of the findings thus arrived at on their respective claims and on the question of possession finally passed an order releasing the property in favour of Dwarka and others. The applicant Dulla went up in revision against the said order. The revisional Court has made a reference to this Court for setting aside the impugned order. I am of opinion that this reference must be accepted.

4. The order of the learned Magistrate shows that there was nothing on the record which could suggest that there was any danger of a breach of the peace. Under the circumstances the learned Magistrate found that there was no likelihood of a breach of the peace in respect of the plot. In spite of it the trial Court went through the entire gamut of procedure prescribed by Section 145, Criminal P. C., for the purpose of determining in whose favour the release order should be passed.

5. The procedure adopted is unwarranted by law. Once it is found that there is no danger of a breach of the peace, the foundation for action under Section 145, Criminal P. C., disappears. The Magistrate has no jurisdiction to proceed further and must immediately stay his hand. Ho cannot convert himself into a civil Court and go on to decide the case on merits or to givo a finding either on the question of title or on the question of possession for any ulterior or subsidiary pur-pose. The only course open to him is to cancel his initial order and to quash all proceedings under Section 145, Criminal P. C.

6. I accordingly accept the recommendation of the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Unnao, set aside the order and direct that the entire proceedings under Section 145, Criminal P. C., shall stand cancelled.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial