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

Explanation using Example

Example 1:

Scenario: Dispute over Agricultural Land

Ramesh and Suresh are neighboring farmers in a village in Maharashtra. They have a long-standing dispute over a piece of agricultural land that both claim to possess. The tension between them has escalated to the point where there is a real threat of violence.

Application of Section 145:

1. Report to Magistrate: The local police officer, aware of the escalating tension, files a report to the Executive Magistrate, indicating that the dispute is likely to cause a breach of peace.
2. Order by Magistrate: The Magistrate, satisfied with the report, issues a written order stating the grounds of his satisfaction and requires both Ramesh and Suresh to appear in his court on a specified date with written statements of their respective claims.
3. Service of Order: Copies of the order are served to Ramesh and Suresh, and a copy is also affixed to a conspicuous place near the disputed land.
4. Hearing and Evidence: On the specified date, both parties present their written statements and evidence. The Magistrate hears both sides without delving into the merits of their claims but focuses on who was in actual possession of the land at the time of the order.
5. Decision: The Magistrate finds that Ramesh was in possession of the land at the time of the order. He issues an order declaring Ramesh entitled to possession until evicted by due process of law and forbids any disturbance of this possession.
6. Restoration of Possession: If it is found that Suresh had forcibly dispossessed Ramesh within two months before the report, the Magistrate may restore possession to Ramesh.

Example 2:

Scenario: Dispute over a Community Water Tank

In a small town in Rajasthan, two groups of residents are in conflict over the use of a community water tank. Group A claims that they have been using the tank for years, while Group B recently started using it, leading to frequent altercations.

Application of Section 145:

1. Report to Magistrate: A police officer, observing the frequent altercations, reports the matter to the Executive Magistrate, indicating that the dispute over the water tank is likely to cause a breach of peace.
2. Order by Magistrate: The Magistrate, upon receiving the report, issues a written order stating the grounds of his satisfaction and requires representatives from both groups to appear in his court on a specified date with written statements of their respective claims.
3. Service of Order: Copies of the order are served to the representatives of both groups, and a copy is also affixed to a conspicuous place near the water tank.
4. Hearing and Evidence: On the specified date, both groups present their written statements and evidence. The Magistrate hears both sides and examines the evidence to determine who was in actual possession of the water tank at the time of the order.
5. Decision: The Magistrate finds that Group A was in possession of the water tank at the time of the order. He issues an order declaring Group A entitled to possession until evicted by due process of law and forbids any disturbance of this possession.
6. Restoration of Possession: If it is found that Group B had forcibly dispossessed Group A within two months before the report, the Magistrate may restore possession to Group A.

Example 3:

Scenario: Dispute over a Market Stall

In a busy market in Delhi, two vendors, Priya and Anil, are in dispute over a particular stall. Both claim to have the right to sell their goods from that stall, leading to frequent arguments and a potential breach of peace.

Application of Section 145:

1. Report to Magistrate: The market inspector, noticing the frequent arguments, reports the matter to the Executive Magistrate, indicating that the dispute over the market stall is likely to cause a breach of peace.
2. Order by Magistrate: The Magistrate, upon receiving the report, issues a written order stating the grounds of his satisfaction and requires both Priya and Anil to appear in his court on a specified date with written statements of their respective claims.
3. Service of Order: Copies of the order are served to Priya and Anil, and a copy is also affixed to a conspicuous place near the market stall.
4. Hearing and Evidence: On the specified date, both parties present their written statements and evidence. The Magistrate hears both sides and examines the evidence to determine who was in actual possession of the market stall at the time of the order.
5. Decision: The Magistrate finds that Priya was in possession of the market stall at the time of the order. He issues an order declaring Priya entitled to possession until evicted by due process of law and forbids any disturbance of this possession.
6. Restoration of Possession: If it is found that Anil had forcibly dispossessed Priya within two months before the report, the Magistrate may restore possession to Priya.