Magistrate's Satisfaction On Apprehension Of Breach Of Public Peace Condition Precedent For Initiating Section 145 CrPC Proceeding: Patna HC

The Patna High Court has said that an Executive Magistrate is expected to invoke proceedings under Section 145  CrPC only when there is an apprehension of breach of public peace, adding that the condition precedent for initiating such proceedings is his satisfaction regarding such apprehension.

Section 145 lays down the procedure to be followed where there is a dispute concerning land or water which is likely to cause breach of peace. It states that when an Executive Magistrate is "satisfied" from a police officer's report or upon other information that a dispute likely to cause a breach of the peace 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 satisfaction and will require 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.

Justice Jitendra Kumar, presiding over the case, stated, “The condition precedent for initiating proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C. is the satisfaction of the Executive Magistrate regarding apprehension of breach of public peace on account of dispute relating to the actual possession of the subject property. Such satisfaction must be based on grounds mentioned in the preliminary order made under Section 145(1) Cr.P.C.”

The court observed that the concept of public peace and tranquility is much wider than instances of tension between few individuals arising out of private disputes between them in regard to landed property. It underscored that "public order and peace affects public at large".

"If the effect of any dispute is confined only to few individuals who are parties to the dispute, such dispute could not give any apprehension of breach of public peace and tranquility. Such private civil disputes comes within exclusive jurisdiction of Civil Court. Extraordinary jurisdiction under Chapter X of the Cr. P.C. has been provided to Executive Magistrates to maintain public peace and tranquility by nipping such breach in the bud," the court said.

Hence, Executive Magistrates are expected to invoke their jurisdiction under Section 145 Cr.PC only in cases where there is apprehension of breach of public peace and tranquility, the court said, adding that they refrain from exceeding their jurisdiction and encroaching upon jurisdiction of Civil Courts.

The above ruling came in a Criminal Revision petition arising from a dispute over possession of land between two parties.

The matter originated from proceedings under Section 144 Cr.P.C., which were later converted into proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C. by the Executive Magistrate in Maharajganj.

The Executive Magistrate had initially ruled in favor of the petitioners, restraining the opposite parties from interfering with the land. However, this order was overturned by the Additional District & Sessions Judge-VI, Siwan, in a Criminal Revision petition, who held that the opposite parties were possessing the disputed land.

There was, as per the factual matrix of the case, a long-standing land dispute in which both sides had conflicting claims of title and possession. Suba Ram and the initial party claimed to be the lawful heirs of original khatiyani raiyat Jita Chamar and had been in continuous possession of the land in question, to the extent of even having houses constructed on certain portions of it. Alternatively, the petitioners contended that they had bought the land under the operation of a mortgage decree and were paying land revenue to the state by way of installments. The dispute led to the making of Section 144 Cr.P.C. proceedings on the strength of a police report that stated tension between parties.

The petitioners challenged the Sessions Court's ruling, arguing that the Executive Magistrate lacked the jurisdiction to proceed under Section 145 Cr.P.C. in the absence of an apprehension of public disturbance. They asserted that the dispute was purely civil in nature and that any questions regarding title or possessory rights should have been addressed before a competent civil court rather than through criminal proceedings.

The High Court, after examining the matter, reiterated that the purpose of Section 145 Cr.P.C. is to maintain public order by preventing disputes from escalating into law-and-order issues.

Citing precedents, the Court clarified that merely because two parties contest ownership or possession does not automatically justify invoking Section 145 Cr.P.C. unless there is a real and imminent threat to public tranquility.

Justice Jitendra Kumar further elaborated: “The remedy for dispute in regard to title and right to possession lies in the civil law and parties concerned are required to move Civil Court for the adjudication of their civil rights and interest. They may also get interim order for protecting the subject property by way of injunction or appointment of receiver. Only dispute regarding actual possession of the parties giving rise to apprehension of public peace and tranquility comes under jurisdiction of Executive Magistrate under Chapter X of Cr.PC.”

“In the case on hand, no such dispute has been mentioned in the preliminary order, nor any satisfaction of learned Executive Magistrate is referred to regarding apprehension of breach of public peace,” Justice Kumar added.

Based on the above findings, the High Court quashed the criminal proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C., while ruling that the Executive Magistrate had overstepped jurisdiction and encroached upon the powers of the civil court.

The Court directed that the parties, if so advised, could seek appropriate remedies before a civil court to resolve their dispute over the land.

Case Title: Nand Jee Singh and ors vs The State of Bihar and ors

LL Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 16

Click Here To Download Judgement