IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.540 of 2008 GAURI SHANKAR PRASAD …… Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, 2. CHANDRIKA SAO, 3. ARUN KUMAR AND 4. KANCHAN DEVI …….. Opposite Parties. ----------- 2. 4.12.2008. N.H./ This revision has been preferred against the order dated 23.2.2008 passed by S.D.M., Rajauli, Nawada in Case No.576(m) of 2007 thereby in a proceeding initiated under section 144 Cr.P.C., the rule has been made absolute against this petitioner and the same has been vacated in favour of the opposite parties. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The grievance of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that certain observations have been made against his title and possession which is beyond the scope of a proceeding under section 144 Cr.P.C. It is further submitted that the period of proceeding i.e. sixty days has already expired long long ago. Having regard to the facts and circumstances as well as the fact that since the validity of the period of proceeding has already expired, it has got no value in the eye of law. However, it is made clear that any observation made against title and possession of either parties shall not effect their claim in future. With this observation, this application stands disposed of. ( Ghanshyam Prasad )