KALINDI DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, this application is being disposed of finally at the admission stage itself.

(2.) It appears that in the year 1979, a proceeding under section 144. Cr. P.C. was drawn up respecting certain land as detailed in Annexure-1 which was subsequently converted into one under section 145, Cr. P.C. Pursuant to that, notice was issued to the parties to show cause. While thematter was pending before the Magistrate and the parties who were to adduce evidence in support of their respective claim, a suit was filed in the year 1984 in ule Court of Subordinate Judge, Patna and accordingly a prayer was made by the petitioner before the Magistrate for dropping it which he declined to do. Thereafter, in the year 1991 a revision application was filed against that order, which was also decided against her.

(3.) The subject-matter of dispute appears to be a piece of land which according to one of the parties, i.e. the opposite party, was allotted to them by the Housing Board. I am, however, not concerned at this stage about the legality or otherwise of the said allotment. The question is whether the proceeding is fit to be dropped, in view of a decision of this Court relied upon by the petitioner reported in Ram Chandra Rai and others v. State of Bihar and others. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the said decision it has been observed that if there is no substantial progress in a proceeding under Section 145, Cr. P.C. even after a period of seven years, it should be deemed to have been dropped and, therefore, the learned Magistrate should have dropped it on this ground or on account of filing of a suit.