MAHA DEVI v. The State of Bihar

The State of Bihar.

Aman Kumar Singh, Son of Jitendra Singh.

Vipin Singh, Son of Late Mahadeo Singh

Suresh Singh, Son of Late Janak Singh. Shila Nath Singh, Son of Late Janak Singh. Ramesh Singh, Son of Late Janak Singh. Ranjeet Kumar Singh, Son of Late Janak Singh. Jalandhar Singh Son of Late Ratan Singh.

Madan Singh Son of Late Ratan Singh.

Satyendra Singh Son of Late Mosafir Singh. All resident of Village - Parsherampur, P.O.- Parshurampur, P.S.- Amnour, District- Saran at Chapra, Pin Code- 84140. ... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner For the State For Opp. Parties Mr. Jeetendra Narayan, Advocate Mr. Navin Kumar Pandey, APP Mr. Sushil Kumar Singh, Advocate Mr. Bindeswari Singh, Advocate : : : ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 3 11-05-2023 Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. The petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated

22.03.2021 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge VII, Saran at Chapra, in Criminal Revision No. 280 of 2021, whereby and whereunder the learned Additional Sessions Judge has dismissed the revision application filed by the husband of Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56188 of 2021(3) dt.11-05-2023 the petitioner; and also for quashing the order dated 24.10.2019 passed by the Executive Magistrate, Marhaura, Saran, in Tr. No. 08 of 2019, by which the learned Magistrate has not dropped the proceeding initiated under Section 145 of the Cr.P.C in spite of the fact that with regard to dispute of the same land, Title Suit No. 34 of 2019 is sub-judice in the Court of learned Sub-Judge, 1st, Saran at Chapra. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for the same dispute, earlier the uncle of the opposite party no.2 had approached the Court of Sub-Divisional Magistrate and the Court had ordered that the party can take recourse to Civil Suit proceeding.

Accordingly, the petitioner side had filed Title Suit No.34 of 2019, which is pending in the Court of Sub Judge-I, Saran at Chapra. In that proceeding, the uncle of the opposite party no.2 is already a party. Now, the opposite party no.2, for the same land, has filed an application under Section 144 of the Cr.P.C. though with regard to the same land, the aforesaid Title Suit is pending, which in my opinion, is clearly an abuse of the process of the Court. If the opposite party no.2 is aggrieved by any action of the petitioner, he should have filed an application for injunction in the aforesaid title suit. The submission of the opposite party no.2 that he is Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56188 of 2021(3) dt.11-05-2023 not a party in the title suit can not be entertained as one family member is already a party in the title suit and he cannot subsequently invoke to initiate another proceeding under Section 144 of the Cr.P.C. when the earlier proceeding initiated at the instance of the uncle of the opposite party no.2 has been disposed of.