IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Revision No.1840 of 2009 Randhir Kumar son of Late Kamtanandan Prasad resident of Mohalla- Amber (Ucka Par), P. S. – Bihar Sarif, Town & District- Biharsarif, Nalanda. .. Petitioner. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Surendra Mahto son of Late Bhattu Mahto 3. Bhushan Kumar son of Surendra Mahto 4. Deepak Kumar son of Surendra Mahto 5. Arun @ Arjun Prasad son of Late Bhattu Mahto 6. Anil Kumar son of Arjun Prasad 7. Sudhir Kumar son of Arjun Prasad 8. Ajay Mahto son of late Bhattu Mahto 9. Nitesh Kumar son of Ajay Mahto. 10.Chotu @ Saurabh Kumar son of Ajay Mahto. 11.Sunil Kumar Sinha son of late Shyam Narayan Prasad Sinha. 12.Rakesh Kumar Sinha son of Late Shyam Narayan Prasad Sinha. 13.Sanjay Kumar Sinha son of late Shyam Narayan Prasad Sinha 14.Ashok Kumar Roy son of Late Janki Mahto All resident of Mohalla- Amber (Ucka Par), P.S. Bihar Sarif, Town & District- Biharsarif, Nalanda. … Opposite Parties. ---------------------------------- 2. 08.12.2011 The 1st party petitioner has preferred this revision application against the order dated 24.8.2009 passed by the learned Subdivision Magistrate, Biharsarif, Nalanda in Case No. 199 (MP) of 2009 by which the rule has been vacated and the proceeding has been dropped. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that although rule has been vacated but the learned Magistrate has dealt with title matter in the 2 impugned order which is beyond the scope of Section 144 Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the State submits that since the impugned order has already lost its force, no interference is required. It is an admitted fact that the impugned order has already lost its force. Suffice it to say that the impugned order will not cause any prejudice to either of the parties in future litigation. This petition stands disposed of. Kanchan (Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)