CRIMINAL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE NO. 563 OF 1997 **** In the matter of an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. **** Raghaw Rai, son of Sri Ramashish Rai, resident of village and P.O. Sher, P.S. Sidhwalia, District Gopalganj………………………………………………………………………………….Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Harendra Sah, son of Madhav Lal Sah 3. Chandradeo Raut 4. (a) Lal Babu Raut (b) Sudesh Raut (c) Fagu Raut (d) Ramesh Raut, son of Late Indradeo Raut, all residents of Village + P.O. Sher, P.S. Sidhwalia, District Gopalganj……………………………Respondents **** For the Petitioner: Mr. Nand Kishore Pd. Sinha, Advocate **** P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANANDAN SINGH Jayanandan Singh,J. In this writ application challenge is to an order passed by learned 3rd Additional District & Sessions Judge, Gopalganj in Criminal Revision No. 78 of 1992 / 16 of 1992 by which criminal revision of the petitioner against the order dated 27.03.1992 passed by the learned Executive Magistrate, Gopalganj in a proceeding under Section 147 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, “the Cr.P.C.”) in Trial No.1677/91 has been dismissed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner - 2 - submits that in the revision, the learned court has decided title of the land which was beyond the scope of Section 147 of the Cr.P.C. He also submits that during the pendency of the proceeding before the learned Magistrate, father of the petitioner, who was a party, died and his heirs were not substituted. The order of the learned court below shows that the petitioner had appeared before the learned Magistrate on behalf of the father and had contested the proceeding. 3. So far as question of title is concerned, finding of the learned court below in respect of the title of the plot is unwarranted in law. However, since the matter is old one, this Court is not inclined to interfere. 4. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to file a substantive suit for declaration of his title and for confirmation of possession. If the suit is filed within two months from today and a petition for ad interim injunction is filed in the suit latest within one month from the date of filing of the suit, operation of the impugned orders of the learned Magistrate as well as learned appellate court - 3 - shall remain stayed till disposal of the injunction petition which the court concerned may make all endeavours to dispose of at an early date. 5. It is made clear that if the suit and injunction petition are not filed within time allowed by this Court, the orders of the courts below shall become operative. 6. This writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. Patna High Court, Patna The 9th April, 2010 N.A.F. R. (B.T.) (Jayanandan Singh, J.)