SHIV CHARAN MAHTO Vs. RAMASHRAY MAHTO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the order passed by the Executive Magistrate, Barh in a proceeding under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in Misc. Case No. 1886M of 1992.

(2.) THE first party of the proceeding is the revisionist before this Court and the order was passed in favour of second party of the proceeding who are opposite parties before this Court. 25

(3.) IT was submitted before me by the petitioners lawyer that several witnesses were examined by the revisionists first party and one or two witnesses only were examined by the 2nd party (O.P. here). The learned Magistrate relied on certain unexhibited document filed by the O.P. 2nd party 35 and his documents were copies of Register II, certain rent receipts and unregistered deed of will and gift, whereas several documents were exhibited on behalf of revisionist first party. So the impugned order is vitiated by misapplication of procedure.