SURENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the opposite parties no. 2 to 8.

(2.) The petitioner has moved the Court under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Code') against the order dated 19.12.2017 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, IV, Siwan in Criminal Revision No. 02 of 2016, by which he has set aside the order dated 06.07.2015, passed by the Executive Magistrate, Maharajganj under Section 145 of the Code in Misc. Case No. 76 of 2015, declaring the possession of the petitioner on Khata No. 99, Plot No. 1269 having area of 1 Katha 3 dhurs.

(3.) The petitioner claims to have bought the land out of the ancestral property of Dularo Kuer, who inherited it from her father Saryug Thakur after there being partition between the coparceners. The same share of 1 Katha 3 dhurs of land purchased by the petitioner is said to have also been taken possession by him upon proper demarcation. However, from the sale deed, the boundaries are not clearly demarcated as it is only said that the land is in the middle of a larger plot in which the other sharers have also their share of land. The Executive Magistrate on a petition filed by the father of the opposite parties no. 2 to 8 had initiated action under Section 145 of the Code and finally by order dated 06.07.2015 had held the land in question to be in the possession of the petitioner and had restrained the opposite parties no. 2 to 8 from interfering in the same. Being aggrieved by such order, the opposite parties no. 2 to 8, moved in Criminal Revision No. 2 of 2016, which has been decided in their favour by the impugned order.