Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 145,537

(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898),   S. 145-Omission of Magistrate to record his satisfaction as to existence of dispute likely to cause breach of peace-Mere irregularity curable under S. 537, Cr. P. C.   Md. Ishaque Chowdhury and others v. Nur Mahal Begum and others P L D 1961 S C 426 rel.   Kapoor Chand and another v. Suraj Prasad A I R 1933 All. 264 and Ratan and others v. Tika A I R 1939 Lah. 233 ref.   (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898),   S. 145----Magistrate not recording grounds of his satisfaction as to existence of dispute likely to cause breach of peace but perusing petition and hearing parties-No prejudice to any party-Held, interference with impugned order not called for.  JUDGMENT   This is a reference by Mr. A. S. Md. Rashed, Session Judge, Khulna, recommending that the order made by Mr. S. S. Ahsan, Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Bagerhat, on 8-11-63, drawing up proceedings under section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure should be set aside.   The learned Sessions Judge has based his recommendation on the ground that "the order complained of does not disclose that there was any such likelihood of a breach of peace", and that the Magistrate while passing the order did not set out the grounds on which he was satisfied that a dispute likely to cause a breach of the peace existed.   It is true that the impugned order does not record satisfaction of the Magistrate as to the existence of the likelihood of the breach of peace. It however, appears that the Magistrate received the petition under section 145 of the Code on 11-10-63. He did not pass any order on that day. He issued a notice on the second party to show cause why proceedings should not be drawn up. That was necessary for the Magistrate to do at the first instance. It seems that he was proceeding with utmost caution in the matter and that is why even before drawing up of the proceedings he gave the second party an opportunity to show cause why proceedings should not be drawn up. He thereafter heard both the parties and he drew up the proceeding. In the order noted in the order-sheet on 8-11-63, he did not say that he was…