JUDGMENT : A.K. Padhi, J. - A preliminary order u/s 145(1), Code of Criminal Procedure was issued by the S.D.J.M. Kendrapara vide Crl. Misc. Case No. 43 of 1980 on 2-5-1980. In the said Proceeding the Petitioner was arrayed as Sectionond party No. 2. After receiving the preliminary order the Petitioner filed an application to drop the proceeding on the ground that apprehension of breach of peace is no more subsisting as a title suit is pending, regarding the same subject matter of dispute in which ad interim injunction had already been granted another proceeding u/s 15 of the OLR Act is also pending regarding the same subject matter between the parties to adjudicate the relationship of landlord and tenant. 2. The learned Magistrate heard both the parties and was of the opinion that since the suit has been stayed after the order of ad interim injunction was passed and as no receiver has been appointed u/s 15(7) of the OLR Act the apprehension of the breach of peace continues and the 145 Code of Criminal Procedure proceeding should not be dropped. A revision was carried against the order refusing to drop the proceeding. The revisional authority was of the opinion that since the order of the Magistrate refusing to drop the proceeding is an interlocutory order the same is not revisable 1 he orders passed by the trial Court and revisional Court dated 3-9-1980 and 11-9-1980 respectively as per Annexure 3 and 4 are assailed in this writ application as a Sectionond revision under the Code of Criminal Procedure is not maintainable. 3. The undisputed facts are that for the land in dispute, comprising an area of A. 683 dec. OLR Case No. 10 of 1980 u/s 15(d) was filed by opposite party No. 1 against opposite parties 2 and 3. The Petitioner is the transferee-in-interest of opposite parties 2 and 3. On 28-5-1980 the Petitioner was impleaded as a party in the OLR proceeding. On 2-3-1980 the Preliminary order u/s 145 Code of Criminal Procedure was passed regarding the disputed properties which is Ac. 688 dec. The Petitioner is the transferee-in-interest of opposite parties 2 and 3. On 28-5-1980 the Petitioner was impleaded as a party in the OLR proceeding. On 2-3-1980 the Preliminary order u/s 145 Code of Criminal Procedure was passed regarding the disputed properties which is Ac. 688 dec. In the meantime, the Petitioner filed Title Suit No. 135 of 1980 in the Court of the Munsif, Kendrapara praying for adjudicating the right, title and interest of the parties Mise Case No. 190 of 1980 was filed in Title Suit No. 135 of 1980 praying for ad interim injunction which was granted on 7-5-1980. The opposite parties after getting notice in the Title Suit appeared and prayed before the learned Munsif to stay further proceedings in Title Suit No. 135 of 1980 stating therein that since the OLR Court is in (sic) of the matter for adjudicating the relationship of the landlord and tenant between the Petitioner and the opposite parties, the suit ought to be stayed. The learned Munsif vide order dated 15-7-1981 has stayed further proceeding in Title Suit No. 135 of 1980 awaiting disposal of the OLR Case. Counsel for both sides admit that no final order has been passed varying the ad interim injunction passed in the suit. 4. Apprehension of breach of peace vests jurisdiction on a Magistrate to start or to continue a proceeding u/s 145 Code of Criminal Procedure. It is the settled position of law that during pendency of civil suit or a revenue proceeding between the same parties relating to same dispute the Magistrate is not devoid of jurisdiction to proceed u/s 145 Code of Criminal Procedure But in cases where interim arrangement has been made by the Civil Court or Revenue Court in the matter of possession by injunction or receiver the apprehension of breach of peace disappears. This view of ours finds support from a decision reported in Subala Dehury Vs. Rupakar Dehury and Another. In the case at hand, since ad interim injunction has been passed on 7-5-1980, the apprehension of breach of peace no more exists and the 145, Code of Criminal Procedure proceeding should be dropped. 5. Admittedly, the OLR case is pending between the parties u/s 15(d) of the OLR Act. The Revenue Officer under the OLR Act was power to make interim arrangement regarding the disputed properties u/s 15(7). 5. Admittedly, the OLR case is pending between the parties u/s 15(d) of the OLR Act. The Revenue Officer under the OLR Act was power to make interim arrangement regarding the disputed properties u/s 15(7). It is settled position of law that the OLR Court has the jurisdiction to pass any order u/s 15(7) of the OLR Act for protection of the property and therefore, during the pendency of such a proceeding before the competent revenue authority, proceeding u/s 145 Code of Criminal Procedure is misconceived. 6. In the result, the writ application is allowed and the order of the learned Magistrate u/s 145 Code of Criminal Procedure as per Annexure-2 and the order of the learned Sessions Judge vile Annexure-3 are quashed. The proceeding initiated u/s 145 Code of Criminal Procedure is quashed. In the circumstances of the case there shall be no order as to costs. G.R. Pattnaik, J. 7. I agree. Final Result : Allowed