1 2025:CGHC:4782 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 262 of 2025 1 - Kamla Thakur W/o Late Prakash Singh Thakur Aged About 67 Years R/o Fingeshwar, P.S. Fingeshwar District- Gariyaband (C.G.) 2 - Yogesh Singh Thakur S/o Late Prakash Singh Thakur Aged About 30 Years R/o Fingeshwar, P.S. Fingeshwar District - Gariyaband (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Sub Divisional Magistrate, Rajim, District- Gariyaband 2 - The Sub Divisional Magistrate Rajim, District- Gariyaband C.G. 3 - The Tehsildar Fingeshwar, District- Gariyaband C.G. 4 - The Police Station In Charge P.S. Fingeshwar, District- Gariyaband C.G. 5 - The Revenue Inspector Fingeshwar, District- Gariyaband C.G. 6 - The Patwari P.H.No. 09 Fingeshwar, District- Gariyaband C.G. 7 - The Kotwar Fingeshwar, District- Gariyaband C.G. 8 - Meena Singh Thakur W/o Late Ravi Singh Thakur Aged About 37 Years R/o Fingeshwar, P.S. Fingeshwar District- Gariyaband C.G. 2 9 - Ishwary Sahu W/o Kamlesh Sahu Aged About 40 Years R/o Fingeshwar, P.S. Fingeshwar District- Gariyaband C.G. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Neelam Jaiswani, Advocate For Respondent No. 1-7 For Respondent No. 8-9 : : Mr. Neeraj Sharma, Dy. A.G. along with Mr. Pranjal Shukla None Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 27/01/2025 1. None appears for respondent no. 8 and 9 though duly served. 2. With the consent of the parties heard finally. 3. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 against the order dated 03.01.2025 passed by Sub- Divisional Magistrate, Rajim, District-Gariyaband (C.G.) in Misc. Criminal Case No. 202412221600028/2024-25 under Section 164 of BNSS, 2023 in which Sub-Divisional Magistrate had passed an order and directed Tehsildar and Police Station Incharge to take the crops of disputed land and give it under the possession of Village Kotwar. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioners are the owner and absolute possession holder of land bearing Khasra no. 1477/3, 1484/3, 1486/2, 2345/2, 2392/2, 2482/2 and 2422/2 with areas measuring 0.02, 0.02, 0.05, 0.78, 0.07, 0.18, and 0.18 hectares 3 respectively. The petitioner and his family(excluding respondent no. 8) have been cultivating paddy crops on these lands from several years and selling the harvested crops in the local Mandi (market). These lands are used consistently for agricultural purposes, contributing to the petitioner’s livelihood through the sale of the crops grown, further for the year 2016 to 2024 tokens and receipts which is issued and showing that the total area was cultivated by the petitioners. The petitioner has been in continuous possession of the aforementioned land and has cultivated the same in the present agricultural year, following regular farming practices. Despite this, respondent no. 8 has unlawfully and falsely executed a Reghanama for 3 years in favor of respondent no. 9, Ishwary Sahu. It is important to highlight that respondent no. 9 is neither the legal owner of the land nor does she have any rightful possession of it. The land in question is solely under the possession and ownership of the petitioner, and the Reghanama dated 30.10.2023 made by the respondent no. 8 is therefore based on fraudulent and illegal claims. On 21.11.2024, respondent no. 8 lodged a complaint with the police station in charge of Fingeshwar, District- Gariyaband, alleging that the petitioners had without informing her, forcefully harvested her crops. On her complaint, respondent no. 8 requested that necessary action be taken against the petitioners. Based on this complaint, the police in charge filed an Istaghasa under Section 164 of BNSS before the SDM, Rajim, District- Gariyaband. 4 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioners are the owner and absolute possession holder of land bearing Khasra no. 1477/3, 1484/3, 1486/2, 2345/2, 2392/2, 2482/2 and 2422/2 with areas measuring 0.02, 0.02, 0.05, 0.78, 0.07, 0.18, and 0.18 hectares respectively and they have cultivated the paddy crops. She further contended that the paddy crops are a perishable goods and it rots easily. She again submitted that if the paddy crops will not be sold then the petitioners will have to bear a huge loss and prays to sell the crops in the Mandi and sale amount shall be deposited in the Treasury. 6. Learned State Counsel raised no objection in this regard. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 8. On perusal of record, it transpires that there is a land dispute by and between the parties because of which the learned Sub- Divisional Magistrate Rajim vide its order dated 03.01.2025 has ordered the Tehsildar Fingeshwar and Station Incharge Fingeshwar to take the crops from petitioner no. 2 herein and handover/supurd it to the Village Kotwar till the resolution of the dispute between the parties. 9. Since the paddy crops are of a perishable nature which cannot be kept for long and the last date to sell the crops in Mandi is 31.01.2025, therefore, it is directed that the paddy crops which has been handed over to the Village Kotwar be sold in the Government Market (Mandi) in the supervision of Sub-Divisional 5 Officer or through his subordinates and the amount so received shall be deposited either to the Najir Tehsil Najarat or be deposited in the Treasury and when the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate passes a final order in the pending Misc. Criminal Case No. 202412221600028/2024-25 the amount so deposited shall be disbursed to the concerned party. 10. With the aforesaid direction, the present petition is disposed off. 11. C.C. tomorrow. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Madhurima