Patna High Court - Orders
Ram Narain Sah vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 April, 2014
Author: Jyoti Saran
Bench: Jyoti Saran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Revision No.1141 of 2013
======================================================
Ram Narain Sah, son of late Lakhan Sah, resident of village Bherokhara,
P.S. Tajpur, District Samastipur
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Rajendra Giri
3. Surendra Giri, both son of Raksha Giri, resident of village-Jogia
Math (Bherokhara), P.S. Tajpur, District Samastipur
4. Kunkun Sah
5. Surendra Sah both sonof late Lakhan Sah, Resident of village
Bherokhara, P.S. Tajpur, District Samastipur
6. Kameshwar Bhagat, son of Amrit Bhagat, resident of village
Adharpur, P.S. Samastipur, District Samastipur
.... .... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhirendra Kumar
For the Respondent/s : APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN
ORAL ORDER
6 15-04-2014Heard Mr. Dhirendra Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner.
In a proceeding bearing M.R. No. 95 of 1977/T.R.No. 26 of 2005 initiated under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure at the instance of the opposite parties, the possession of the petitioner who was the second party in the Court below was declared. The 1st party went in revision before the Court below and the Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C.2nd, Samastipur in Cr.Rev. No. 565 of 2005/14 of 2008 while taking into consideration that there were certain documents passed in consolidation proceedings which had been filed by the opposite 2 Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1141 of 2013 (6) dt.15-04-2014 2/2 party who was the 1st party in the Court below belatedly and had bearing on the contest, deemed it proper to remand the matter for a decision afresh and in accordance with law after giving opportunity to the 1st party to lead the same as evidence as also opportunity to the second party who is the petitioner before this Court to rebut the same.
Considering the satisfaction drawn by the revisional Court for remanding the matter, this Court finds no justification to interfere with the same and this application is accordingly disposed of.
This Court however would like to place on record that since this matter is pending consideration since 1977, the original Court shall proceed to dispose of the same in accordance with law expeditiously.
(Jyoti Saran, J) Bibhash/-