CrPC Section 145 — Procedure where dispute concerning land or water is likely to cause breach of peace

CHAPTER X MAINTENANCE OF PUBLIC ORDER AND TRANQUILLITY — parte.

General

Summary

Sub-section (1) applies when an Executive Magistrate receives a police report or other information and is satisfied that a dispute about land, water or its boundaries within the Magistrate’s local area is likely to cause a breach of the peace. The Magistrate must make a written order explaining the grounds for that view and require the parties to attend court, in person or through a pleader, at a specified date and time. They must submit written statements setting out their respective claims about who was actually in possession of the disputed subject.

Sub-section (2) includes buildings, markets, fisheries, crops and other produce of land, and the rents or profits of such property, within the meaning of “land or water” for this section.

Sub-section (3) requires a copy of the order to be served as the Code provides for serving a summons, on the person or persons directed by the Magistrate. At least one copy must also be displayed in a noticeable place at or near the disputed subject.

Sub-section (4) requires the Magistrate to examine the written statements, hear the parties and receive the evidence they produce, without considering the merits of their claims to a right to possess the disputed subject. The Magistrate may take further evidence considered necessary and, if possible, decide which party was in possession on the date of the order under sub-section (1).

Proviso to sub-section (4): If it appears to the Magistrate that a party was forcibly and wrongfully dispossessed within the two months before the Magistrate received the police report or other information, or after receiving it but before making the order under sub-section (1), the Magistrate may treat that party as having been in possession on the date of the order.

Sub-section (5) allows a party required to attend, or any other interested person, to show that the described dispute does not or did not exist. If that is shown, the Magistrate must cancel the order and stop further proceedings under it. Subject to cancellation in this way, the order under sub-section (1) is final.

Clause (a) of sub-section (6) applies if the Magistrate decides that a party was in possession, or should be treated as having been in possession under the proviso to sub-section (4). The Magistrate must issue an order declaring that party entitled to possession until evicted through due process of law, and forbidding disturbance of that possession until then. When proceeding under the proviso to sub-section (4), the Magistrate may restore possession to the party who was forcibly and wrongfully dispossessed.

Clause (b) of sub-section (6) requires the order under sub-section (6) to be served and published in the way set out in sub-section (3).

Sub-section (7) allows the Magistrate, when a party to the proceeding dies, to have that party’s legal representative made a party to the proceeding. Once the representative is made a party, the Magistrate must continue the inquiry. If there is a question about who the deceased party’s legal representative is for the proceeding, all people claiming to be representatives must be made parties.

Sub-section (8) applies if the Magistrate considers that a crop or other produce of the disputed property is liable to decay quickly and naturally. The Magistrate may order its proper custody or sale, and, when the inquiry is complete, must decide how that property or its sale proceeds are to be disposed of.

Sub-section (9) allows the Magistrate, if considered appropriate and at any stage of the proceedings, to issue a summons on either party’s application. The summons may require a witness to attend or to produce a document or thing.

Sub-section (10) states that this section does not take away the Magistrate’s powers to proceed under section 107.

Official Text

(1) 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, 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.

(2) For the purposes of this section, the expression “land or water” includes buildings, markets, fisheries, crops or other produce of land, and the rents or profits of any such property.

(3) A copy of the order shall be served in the manner provided by this Code for the service of a summons upon such person or persons as the Magistrate may direct, and at least one copy shall be published by being affixed to some conspicuous place at or near the subject of dispute.

(4) The Magistrate shall then, without reference to the merits or the claims of any of the parties to a right to possess the subject of dispute, persue the statements so put in, hear the parties, receive all such evidence as may be produced by them, take such further evidence, if any, as he thinks necessary, and, if possible, decide whether any and which of the parties was, at the date of the order made by him under sub-section (1), in possession of the subject of dispute:

Provided 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 report of a police officer or other information was received by the Magistrate, or after that date and before the date of his order under sub-section (1), he may treat the party so dispossessed as if that party had been in possession on the date of his order under sub-section (1).

(5) Nothing in this section shall preclude any party so required to attend, or any other person interested, from showing that no such dispute as aforesaid exists or has existed; and in such case the Magistrate shall cancel his said order, and all further proceedings thereon shall be stayed, but, subject to such cancellation, the order of the Magistrate under sub-section (1) shall be final.

(6)

(a) If the Magistrate decides that one of the parties was, or should under the proviso to sub-section (4) be treated as being, in such possession of the said subject, he shall issue an order declaring such party to be entitled to possession thereof until evicted therefrom in due course of law, and forbidding all disturbance of such possession until such eviction; and when he proceeds under the proviso to sub-section (4), may restore to possession the party forcibly and wrongfully dispossessed.

(b) The order made under this sub-section shall be served and published in the manner laid down in sub-section (3).

(7) When any party to any such proceeding dies, the Magistrate may cause the legal representative of the deceased party to be made a party to the proceeding and shall thereupon continue the inquiry, and if any question arises as to who the legal representative of a deceased party for the purposes of such proceeding is, all persons claiming to be representatives of the deceased party shall be made parties thereto.

(8) If the Magistrate is of opinion that any crop or other produce of the property, the subject of dispute in a proceeding under this section pending before him, is subject to speedy and natural decay, he may make an order for the proper custody or sale of such property, and, upon the completion of the inquiry, shall make such order for the disposal of such property, or the sale-proceeds thereof, as he thinks fit.

(9) The Magistrate may, if he thinks fit, at any stage of the proceedings under this section, on the application of either party, issue a summons to any witness directing him to attend or to produce any document or thing.

(10) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to be in derogation of powers of the Magistrate to proceed under section 107.

Sections referred to

Referred to by

Related Judgments

  • Amit Ramchandra Gupta vs The State of Maharashtra and anr, .., …, Mr.Virendrasinh V. Tapkir wit — Bombay High Court (Mumbai Principal Seat) (2023)
  • Mohammed Ali Bhai. vs The State of Maharashtra & ors — Bombay High Court (Mumbai Principal Seat) (2015)
  • RAMCHANDRA AGGARWAL AND ANR. vs STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR — Supreme Court of India (1966)
  • SHAKUNT ALA DEVI & ORS. vs CHAMRU MAHTO & ANR — Supreme Court of India (2009)

Old <-> New Code Mapping

  • BNSS §164 — Procedure where dispute concerning land or water is likely to cause breach of peace