IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.7990 of 2006 BISHUNDEO SHARMA Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- For the petitioner 2nd party : Mr. Pramod Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhaya, A.P.P. For O.P. Nos. 2& 3 : Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Advocate For O.P. No. 4 : Mr. Shubhesh Pandey, Advocate O R D E R This application is directed against the order dated 14.12.2005 passed by the learned Presiding Judge, F.T.C. No. III, Begusarai in Cr. Revision No. 129 of 2005, whereby while dismissing the revision he has affirmed the order dated 21.3.2005 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Begusarai, in Case No. 401 of 2003 ordering attachment of land in question in exercise of power under section 146(1) Cr.P.C. after he had failed in deciding the question under section 145 Cr.P.C. proceeding and appointing the Mukhia of Ulao Gram Panchayat to be the receiver of the same by ignoring the fact that the petitioner has his residential house thereupon. I have perused the two impugned orders and the learned Presiding Judge, Fast Track Court has succinctly dealt with the entire issue and for cogent reason assigned therein has dismissed the plea of the revisionist. It appears that the plea taken by the revisionists was that the date fixed in the case was 28.3.2005 which was recalled and the order was passed on 21.3.2005 and the petitioner did not have any opportunity to place his contentions. - 2 - It appears from the photocopy of the certified copy of the ordersheet of the Magiterial Court that on 2.3.2005 the case was fixed for 14.3.2005 and as the record was required in another Court, the same was sent and received back on 15.3.2005 when the date was fixed for 21.3.2005 and on that date haziri was filed on behalf of the 1st party and the intervenors but no haziri was filed on behalf of 2nd party nor he was present at the time of hearing. Even the intervenor was absent at the time of the hearing and as the learned Magistrate was not in a position to decide the dispute between the parties he rightly passed order under section 146(1) Cr.P.C. attaching the property and appointing receiver therefor. There appears no apparent illegality in the said order of the revisional court as also the learned Magistrate which cause for interference by this Court. Accordingly, this application is dismissed and the status quo granted by order dated 21.7.2006 is hereby vacated. Patna High Court, Patna. Dated : The 10th of September, 2008 Sanjay Pd./A.F.R. (Abhijit Sinha, J.)