ORDER: The petitioner is 2nd Party in Case No.D/1045 of 2005 under Section 145 of the Criminal Procedure Code (for short 'Cr.P.C') before the Revenue Divisional Officer and Sub- Divisional Magistrate, Mancherial, Adilabad District. 2. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate passed an order dated 31.3.2008 under Section 145 Cr.P.C restraining both parties from entering into the land till the dispute is settled. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner approached this Court by contending that he was not given any opportunity of being heard by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate before passing the order. No opportunity was afforded to the petitioner to put forward his contentions and the documents filed by the petitioner were also not taken into consideration, and the Sub-Divisional Magistrate did not mention about the contentions raised by the petitioner, and hence the order passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate is not in accordance with the procedure prescribed under Section 145 Cr.P.C., and the same is liable to be set aside. 3. The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the Sub-Divisional Magistrate passed a preliminary order and served a notice on the petitioner and that the petitioner made his appearance for several adjournments and filed certain documents also. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, after considering the contentions of the parties and on perusal of the documents and revenue records, passed the impugned order, and, there is no violation of the procedure prescribed under Section 145 Cr.P.C. Therefore, the revision is liable to be dismissed. 4. The learned counsel for the respondents conceded that the Sub-Divisional Magistrate did not mention about the contentions raised by the petitioner but he has taken into consideration all the material placed before him and passed the appropriate order. 5. On perusal of the order, it is not mentioned whether the respective parties were required to file their written statements putting forward their contentions along with the documents, if any, and the Sub-Divisional Magistrate did not mention whether the parities were required to adduce any evidence and the order also does not mention about the contentions raised by the respective parties and the answers given by him for those contentions. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgments of this Court and the Apex Court as to the validity of the order under Section 145 Cr.P.C whether it is passed after the procedure prescribed under Section 145 Cr.P.C is followed. 6. In Mohd. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgments of this Court and the Apex Court as to the validity of the order under Section 145 Cr.P.C whether it is passed after the procedure prescribed under Section 145 Cr.P.C is followed. 6. In Mohd. Sadiq and others vs. Mohd. Yousuf Khan and others1 a learned single Judge of this Court observed that under Section 145 Cr.P.C., the proceedings are purely criminal in nature and intended to avert breach of peace and crimes in consequence thereof and the contention that they are civil in nature is patently untenable. 8. In Bheeravolu Madan Mohan Reddy v. Sub-Divisional Magistrate and Revenue Divisional Officer, Polancha, Khammam District and another2 a Division Bench of this Court while considering the scope of Section 145 Cr.P.C held that the order passed by the Executive Magistrate under sub-section (6) of Section 145 Cr.P.C without passing any preliminary order and without notice to the parties is illegal. 9. In Mathuralal, Appellant v. Bhanwarlal and another, Respondents3 the Supreme Court while considering Section 145 Cr.P.C observed as follows:- "Sections 145 and 146 of the Criminal Procedure Code together constitute a scheme for the resolution of a situation where three is a likelihood of a breach of the peace because of a dispute concerning any land or water or their boundaries. If Section 146 is torn out of its setting and read independently of Section 145, it is capable of being construed to mean that once an attachment is effected in any of the three situations mentioned therein, the dispute can only be resolved by a competent Court and not by the Magistrate effecting the attachment. But Section 146 cannot be so separated from Section 145. It can only be read in the context of Section 145. Contextual construction must surely prevail over isolationist construction. Otherwise, it may mislead." 10. But Section 146 cannot be so separated from Section 145. It can only be read in the context of Section 145. Contextual construction must surely prevail over isolationist construction. Otherwise, it may mislead." 10. In Dr.Ratnam and others vs. Sub-Divisional Magistrate and Revenue Divisional Officer, R.R. District and others4 a learned single Judge of this Court held that the Executive Magistrate ordering attachment of disputed property without complying with the provisions of Section 145 Cr.P.C by way of recording his own opinion regarding likelihood of breach of peace, on account of the dispute and failing to call upon the parties to file their written statement as to the actual possession of the land there is omission of mandatory provision and the proceedings are liable to be quashed. 11. From the above, it is clear that the learned Magistrate on receiving the complaint if there is any material to order attachment of the property, he shall record the reasons including his opinion that the situation warrants attachment of the property and shall simultaneously give opportunity to both parties directing them to file written statements along with documents and oral evidence, if any, but the preliminary order passed by the learned Magistrate does not disclose any steps as required under Section 145 Cr.P.C. The final order passed by him also does not disclose the contentions of the parties, or the documents filed by them or the findings of the learned Magistrate on each of the contentions. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate is not in accordance with the procedure laid down under Section 145 Cr.P.C. Therefore, I am inclined to set aside the order. 12. In the result, the Criminal Revision Case is allowed and the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Mancherial is set aside. The learned Magistrate is directed to restore the matter to its original file and give notices to both parties, after their appearance is made, shall afford an opportunity to them to file the written statements and the documents, if any, and also ascertain whether they have any oral evidence, if so, their evidence shall be recorded, and after completion of the enquiry, he shall pass appropriate orders following due procedure prescribed under Section 145 Cr.P.C.