Name: Najeeb Rehman

Roll No. BL- 1724 (VII-A)

Subject: Criminal Procedure-I
Instructor: Sir Asadullah Almani
Assignment-1
Topic : Sections 133, 144, 145 & 146 of
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898
Section 133: Conditional order for removal of nuisance.
 Clause 1: A Magistrate of the first class, upon receiving a police report or other credible
information and after considering any necessary evidence, may issue a conditional order
to address public nuisances. For exercising such powers he is authorized u/s 133 to make
order regarding;
 Removal of obstruction or nuisance: From public ways, rivers, channels, or public places
used by the [Link], Public place includes state-owned properties, camping grounds,
and spaces left unoccupied for sanitation or recreation.
 Regulation of harmful trades or goods: Prohibiting or controlling trades, occupations, or
the storage of goods that harm public health or community comfort.
 Prevention of hazardous activities: Stopping or preventing the erection of buildings,
disposal of substances, or activities that may cause explosions or fires.
 Repair of dangerous structures or trees: Ordering the removal, repair, or support of
unsafe buildings, tents, or trees likely to cause injury.
 Fencing hazardous areas: Requiring tanks, wells, or excavations near public places to be
fenced to prevent danger.
 Dealing with dangerous animals: Ordering the destruction, confinement, or disposal of
such animals.

The person responsible must comply within the time specified in the order or, if
objecting, appear before the Magistrate or another Magistrate of the first class to
request the order’s modification or cancellation.

 Clause 2: Orders issued u/s 133 [Link] cannot be challenged in any Civil Court.

Explanation
1. PLD 2012 pesh. 167: This section is only attracted in cases of emergency or imminent danger
to avoid irreparable loss to public at large. Proceedings u/s 133 are not intended to settle a
private dispute between two members of the Public. The fact that the obstruction has been
allowed to stand without objection in a public place for many years indicates that there was
no such emergency or imminent dangers to the public interest. Therefore action cannot be
taken under this section.
2. General Procedure Under Section 133 of the CrPC: A Magistrate may issue a conditional
order requiring a person to stop or regulate a trade or occupation causing harm. Section 134
mandates serving this order to the concerned person. Under Section 135, the person must
either comply with the order or appear before the Magistrate to contest it. Section 136
states that failure to comply or contest results in the order becoming absolute, with
 penalties under Section 188. Section 137 allows the Magistrate to review objections; if
found unreasonable, the order is dropped. Otherwise, it is confirmed as absolute.
3. Section 133 v. 142 [Link] : Section 133 orders are conditional and remains unexecuted until
the respondent complies or disputes them and ask for a jury. Section 142 allows immediate
action by the Magistrate, regardless of ongoing inquiries or jury involvement, whenever
necessary.
4. Competency: Only Magistrate of 1st class is empowered to make an conditional order. While
exercising such powers he is required to follow Principle of Natural Justice and principle of
Audi Alteram Partem. [1999 [Link].L.J 31]
5. Section 133 v. 268 PPC : Section 268 of the PPC defines public nuisance as acts(including
illegal ommissions) harming or annoying or injuring the public, while Section 133 of the CrPC
provides the procedure to address and remove such nuisances. The former establishes the
offense, and the latter offers the remedy through a Magistrate’s conditional orders, ensuring
public rights and safety.
6. Form of Order: A conditional order under Section 133 CrPC must strictly follow the
prescribed form in Schedule V (Form No. XVI) without modifications. Such an order is not an
injunction but serves as a temporary measure, allowing the respondent to object. It’s not an
absolute order.
7. Nature of Order :The order must not be vague, it must be definite. Where the person
against whom it is directed cannot learn from its terms what it is that he is to do for the
purpose of complying with it, the order will be set aside as being vague and indefinite. [2000
[Link] 1702] and The order has to be directed to a particular individual and cannot be
addressed to the public in general.
8. Discretion of Magistrate: The Magistrate can in his discretion grant such adjournment as
might be necessary. This power exists in a Court irrespective of Procedural provision. Such
Magistrate has also inherent power to dispense with personal attendance and to permit
parties to appear by lawyers in Quasi-judicial proceedings like the 133 CrPC proceedings.
9. Enquiry: Section 436 CrPC under which further inquiry could be ordered will not apply to
such an application (u/s 133 Cr.P.C), so order u/s 436 CrPC in proceedings of Section 133
CrPC are Ultra Vires(without authority).
10. Dropping of proceedings: Even when the opposite party in a proceeding u/s 133 denied the
existence of nuisance, a Magistrate is not competent to drop a proceeding under section
133 of the Code without taking evidence as required by law. The failure of the Magistrate to
record evidence is a serious defect in the procedure which vitiates the order passed by him.
[ PLD 1965 Dacca 366]>
Section 144: Power to issue order absolute at once in urgent cases of
nuisance or apprehended danger.
 Clause 1 : Immediate Action: The Zila Nazim, based on a written recommendation from
the District Superintendent of Police or Executive District Officer, can issue a written
order to prevent obstruction, annoyance, injury, or danger to public safety, tranquility, or
health.
 Clause 2: Ex-parte Orders: In emergencies or when circumstances do not admit to serve
notice, orders may be passed without hearing the affected person.
 Clause 3: Target of Orders:
a. partic individual
b. public generally (when visiting particular place frequently)
 Clause 4: Modification or Rescission: Order u/s 144 can be altered or rescind by;
a. Own Motion (of Zila Nazim or his predecessor in office)
b. Upon an application by an aggrieved person.
 Clause 5: Opportunity to Contest: upon application such aggrieved individual must be
given an opportunity to present his case (in person or by pleader), and if it is rejected
reasons for rejecting his application must be recorded in writing.
 Clause 6: Duration of Orders: Orders cannot remain in force for more than two
consecutive days or seven days in a month unless extended by the Provincial
Government in cases of serious danger, by notification in official gazette.
 Clause 7: Interim Provisions: If local government elections have not been held or where
the Zila Nazim has not assumed office, the District Coordination Officer (DCO) shall
perform these functions.
Provisio: caluse 7 ceases upon the installation of Local Governments.

Explanation
1. Object & Nature of Order: The order u/s 144 is transtory in nature (limited to addressing
temporary and urgent situations). It is designed to manage emergencies or prevent
potential harm until proper legal measures are implemented to safeguard public life and
property. The Zila Nazim is empowered to use this section to handle grave or imminent
threats, ensuring immediate prevention and control of the situation. Order u/s 144 is
Judicial order and may be subject to judicial scrutiny.

2. Protection to the individuals: Section 144 applies not only to potential breaches of
public peace but also to cases involving interference with individual rights. Even if the
 actions in question could lead only to a civil case, the section offers protection to the
aggrieved individual. [PLD 1970 pesh. 19]

3. Competency: Powers u/s 144 could be only exercised by the Zila Nazim, or DCO in
absence of Zila Nazim. [Link]. or secretary, Home department are not competent to
issue order u/s 144, while P. Govt is only competent to extend the period mentioned.

4. Effect of order: such order has no effect of disturbing the title or possession but may
prevent or does prevent the exercise of such right during the Continuance of order,
which a person in possession would be entitled to exercise. Order u/s 144 doesn’t bind
the person who is not the party to under such proceedings.

5. Rescission or alteration of order: such order may be rescinded or altered on cause been
shown. This special jurisdiction is not appellate nor revisional but the special one given
under clause 4 of 144, to the Zila Nazim. “alteration can note mean to substitute the
aprty names but only extend to change in nature of order”. If remedy under 144(4) is not
availed then there is no bar to file a revision petition u/s 439 against duch order.

6. Disobedience of order: Violation of 144 CrPC is provides penal action u/s 188, PPC
(punishment= one-six months or 600-3000 fine or both). And section 195 [Link] provide
procedure for initiating the criminal proceedings against the violator by filing complaint
by the authority which enforced it.

7. Civil Suit: if such order interferes with civic/legal rights of a person, furnishing a Cause of
Action to file a civil suit, such civil suit is maintainable in the existance of the order.

8. Ultra Vires order: If order u/s 144 is passed ultra vires (without authority) and a person
is prosecuted u/s 188 PPC for violating such illegal order, Constitutional jurisdiction may
be availed to quash such case registered against the violator.
Section 145: Procedure where dispute concerning land, etc., is likely to
cause brrach of Peace.

 Clause 1: Procedure when dispute concerning land etc. is likely to cause breach of
peace: A 1st class Magistrate is required to initiate proceedings (when satisfied) upon
Police Report/other information showing existance of a dispute over land, water, or
boundaries within his jurisdiction that may lead to a breach of peace. Proceedings shall
be initiated by order of such Magistrate in writing (stating grounds of his so doing and
the time for appearance) to the parties to attend court (in person or by a pleader) within
time mentioned in the order and submit written claims about possession of such
disputed subject.
 Clause 2: Definition: “Land or water” includes buildings, markets, fisheries, crops, rents,
or profits derived from the property.
 Clause 3: Order Service: The order shall be;
a. Served to person/persons as directed by the Magistrate(in manner of service of
summons), and
b. Published by affixing it’s copy on conspicuous place of disputed subject
 Clause 4: Inquiry into Possession: The Magistrate shall hear the parties, pursue
statements (without reference to the merits or claims), take evidence and may declare
who was in possession at the date of the order (under clause 1)
Provision ~ If dispossession(forcibly and wrongfully) occurred within two months
prior, the wronged party may be treated as in possession.
Provision ~ In emergencies, the disputed property may be temporarily attached.
 Clause 5: Dispute Denial: Nothing in this section prevents any summoned party or
interested person from proving that no such dispute exists or ever existed. If proven, the
Magistrate shall cancel the order, and all related proceedings will be stayed. However,
unless canceled, the Magistrate’s order under subsection (1) remains final.
 Clause 6: Possession Declaration: If the Magistrate determines that one of the parties
was, or should be considered, in possession of the disputed property, he shall issue an
order granting that party the right to retain possession until legally evicted(in due course
of Law). The order will prohibit any interference with their possession, and if wrongful
dispossession is established, the Magistrate may restore possession to the aggrieved
party(under clause (4) 1st provisio)
 Clause 7: Death of a Party: If a party dies, their legal representative can continue the
proceedings and the Inquiry. If question arises who may be LR od such deceased, all
persons claiming to be LR shall be made parties.
  Clause 8: Perishable Property: The Magistrate may order the proper custody or sale of
perishable property (which is subject to speedy and natural decay) during proceedings,
deciding disposal of such property or sale proceeds after completion of inquiry.
 Clause 9: Witness Summons: Either party may request the Magistrate to summon
witnesses or produce documents.
 Clause 10: Additional Powers: This section does not limit the Magistrate’s authority
under Section 107 to prevent breaches of peace.

Explanation;
1. Extent of applicability: this section can be exercised by merely the Magistrate of 1st
class when following essential requirement are fulfilled;
a. Dispute’s existance
b. Dispute likely to cause breach of peace
c. Concern land/waters/boundaries (defined in clause 2 of 145 CrPC)
d. Territorial jurisdiction of the Magistrate

2. Object: The purpose of this section is to prevent imminent apprehension of breach of

peace over movable or immovable property. [2013 SCMR 357]. Main purpose of the
section is to maintain peace and tranquility snd to avoid breach of peace. [2012 [Link]
1411]. Primarily the section concerns the breach of peace arising out of dispute of land
or water [2009 YLR 1835]

3. Dispossession within 2 months: under proceedings of 145 CrPC Magistrate may make
interim order for protecting the person in possession of the land and for doing so the
person dispossessed (forcibly and wrongfully) within period of 2 months Prior the date
of order can be treated as person in possession of land at the date of such order.
Magistrate is duty bound to order restoration of possession to the person so
dispossessed.

4. Comparative study of s/145, 144 and 107 of CrPC; The exercise of power u/s 107 and
144 is discretionary while the u/s 145 CrPC it is mandatory. Therefore a Magistrate is
bound to take action u/s 145. Although s/107 and s/145 overlap regarding prevention of
breach of peace while s/107 is general in nature s/145 is special in nature. s/144
exercisable by the Zila Nazim while s/145 is exercised by the Magistrate of First Class.
 5. Nature of proceedings: A proceeding u/145 falls within the ambit of Inquiry as per
s/4(1)(k) of CrPC and is of Quasi-Executive character. S/145 proceedings are not ultimate
solution of problem but in fact are a prevent measures for time being. [2012 [Link]
1411]. The scheme of these proceedings are means to end rathar then end itself [PLD
2011 pesh. 246]. Application under this section is not a complaint and therefore upon
such application Police enquiry is not an investigation, that’s why 249A provisions are
inapplicable to this section.

6. Stages of Proceedings:
 Stage 1: Order by the Magistrate on Police Report ot any other information for
preventing breach of peace
 Stage 2: Magistrate seek written statements from parties
 Stage 3: Parties sre required to produce Evidence in respect of their claims
 Stage 4: Magistrate determines who was in possession of the disputed property when
such Magistrate took cognizance and ordered u/s 145.
 Stage 5: If by the conclusion Magistrate is satisfied that s party was dispossessed
(forcibly and wrongfully) he may order restoration of possession to the party and such
party retains the same until competent Civil Court orders in this behalf.

7. Movable Property: Movable Property may be considered in purview of this section in

shape of standing crops or other produce of land or rents and profits of land in dispute.
Where movable is included in immovable property or is in the premises of such
immovable property, Magistrate having jurisdiction is competent to make an order u/s
145 in respect of such movable property.
8. Effect of Order: An order u/s 145 is final and conclusive and is intended to be effective
until the party in whose favour the order is made is evicted by in due course of Law .
9. Revision: Revision can only be filed when order under this section is judicial in nature,
while when it’s executive or administrative in nautre, revision petition is not
maintanable.

Section 146: Power to attach subject of dispute.

 Clause 1: Attachment of Property: If the Magistrate cannot determine possession or decides
that no party was in possession of the disputed property, he may attach the property until a
competent court resolves ownership or possession rights.

Proviso: The Magistrate can withdraw the attachment if the risk of a breach of peace no
longer exists.
 Clause 2: Appointment of Receiver: The Magistrate may appoint a receiver (is not appointed
by a Civil Court for such disputed property) for the attached property, granting him the
powers of a receiver under the CPC, subject to control of the Magistrate.

Proviso: If a civil court subsequently appoints a receiver for the same property, the
Magistrate’s receiver must hand over possession and be discharged.

Explanation:
1. Scope: proceedings of 146 are mere the continuation of section 145 of CrPC. This section
become applicable after Magistrate has completed inquiry under 145 and recorded the
finding.
2. Order of Attachment: The object of attachment is to keep the property in custodia legis
so as to prevent the contesting parties from creating breach of peace in their attempts
to obtain actual possession of the property, until the rights of parties are effectively
determined by competent court. [1980 [Link].L.J 588]. Magistrate can only pass order
under 145 and 146 for attachment if he is unable to satisfy himself as to which of the
parties is in the possession of the disputed property. [2012 [Link].L.J 946]

3. Combined possession: When the dispute property is partially possessed by the parties,
Magistrate shall not make an order u/s 146 for attachment of such property.

4. Effect of attachment: When the land is attached the Magistrate can not permit one of
the parties to use it. The attachment doesn’t operate as dispossession of the rightful
owner od the property. Art. 47 of Limitation Act is inapplicable in respect of property
attached u/s 146 [Link].
5. Remedies for 3rd Parties: When 3rd Parties are injured by attachment of such property
by the Magistrate they have two remedies
a. They can apply to the Magistrate withdraw the attachment on ground that
no fear of breach of peace exists any longer
b. They can file a suit to establish that they are the person entitled to possession
6. Withdrawal of attachment: The Magistrate (or his successor in office) who have
attached the property is satisfied at any time that by withdrawal of such attachment
there is no likelihood of any apprehension of breach of peace, he may withdraw such
attachment.
7. Review and Revision: Magistrate acting under 146 has no power to review (except for
correcting the clerical error) or revise the order made under this section.