Order.- Under section 145, clause (4), Criminal Procedure Code, the Court has a right to attach the property in dispute and under sub-clause (8) of section 145, Criminal Procedure Code, if the Magistrate is of opinion that any crop or other produce of the property, the subject of dispute, is subject to speedy and natural decay, he may make an order for the proper custody or sale of such property and after the completion of the enquiry he may make such order as to the disposal of such property as he thinks fit. Now, in this case, the Magistrate was perfectly justified in attaching the property in dispute as he considered this case as one of emergency. But it is contended that the Tahsildar through whom the property was attached has no right to lease the land nor has the Court power to lease it out pending disposal of the proceedings under section 145, Criminal Procedure Code. As pointed out by Sankaran Nair, J., in Srinivasa Pillai v. Satkayappa Pillai1, the Receiver or Officer appointed under section 145(4), Criminal Procedure Code, has not got the same powers as Receiver under section 146, Criminal Procedure Code. In the latter case he has all the powers of a receiver appointed under the Code of Civil Procedure but in the former case his powers are limited and they are restricted to the taking into custody of what is on the land and disposing it of under the orders of the Magistrate. There can therefore be no leases by the Tahsildar appointed to attach the land. But it is open to him to take security from those who are willing to cultivate the land and the security can be taken from those who are willing to give highest security. Whoever cultivates the land after giving such security does so under orders of the Court and will abide by the orders of Court. With these observations, the Criminal Revision Petition is dismissed. K.S. ----- Petition dismissed.