IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA SLA No.42 of 2011 Mahendra Paswan Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors ---------------------------------- 2. 6.9.2011 After having heard learned counsel for the applicant and after considering the grounds indicated in the interlocutory application, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned by allowing I.A. No. 1887 of 2011. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant also on the merit of this application which seeks Special Leave of the Court to appeal against judgment of acquittal passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khagaria, in Complaint Case No. 224 ( C) of 1995 and I am proceeding to dispose of this application. Undisputed fact is that there was a disputed land bearing Khata No. 367, Plot No. 1398 at Village Bachhauta. It was stated by the present applicant- complainant that the accused persons came, entered inside his house which was standing on the part of the above noted plot and dragged the present applicant and his brother to take them to the Sub- divisional Magistrate, Khagaria. Not only that, the house which was standing over the above noted plot was also demolished and complete structure was loaded on a tractor trolley and taken away. Besides, the house of the applicant was set ablaze as a result of which the properties stored therein were also gutted. Anandi Paswan, the brother of the 2 complainant was confined illegally and wrongly for the whole night and thereafter he was let off from the Police Out Post when he came and filed the complaint. The learned court below recorded that there was consistent evidence of the prosecution as regards its case and support thereto coming therefrom. However, after considering the defence of the accused which was documented in the form of a decree of the civil court in their favour and different public records in the forms of various orders issued by the Sub-divisional Magistrate, the Chief Judicial Magistrate went on to hold that it might be an act of exercising right of private defence as the opposite parties could have been within their rights to demolish the hut which had stealthily been put up by the present applicant and his brother during night so as to creating the evidence of possession over the area of plot no. 1398 measuring 16 Kathas which was belonging to the opposite parties. The learned trial court has also noted that 16 Kathas of the same land had been decreed by the competent civil court in favour of the opposite parties and the applicant and his brother time and again were interfering with the possession of the opposite parties which was creating law and order problem as a result of which the Sub-divisional Magistrate, Khagaria, initiated 107 Cr. P.C. proceeding and then also proceedings under Sections 144 and 145 Cr. P.C. and, lastly, on 7.7.1995 the present applicant was arrested 3 under Section 151 Cr.P.C. in order to obviate any chance of commission of cognizable offence by him. Regard being had to the reasons which have been assigned by the learned trial court, I find that the result which was recorded by him in favour of the opposite parties was justified and the view which was taken by the learned trial court was also a probable view and in that light, I do not find any merit in the present petition seeking Special Leave to appeal. The petition appears of no merit. It is dismissed. Kanth ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)