IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10834 of 2011 Aliraj Mian @ Aliraj Ali Versus Amir Mian ^ Ors ----------- 03. 18.07.2011 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. This writ application has been filed by the petitioner for setting aside the order dated 15.03.2011 passed by Subordinate Judge VI, Gopalganj in Title Suit No.27 of 1998 whereby the learned Court below rejected the prayer of the defendant-petitioner to exhibit the photocopy of the order passed in a proceeding under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the plaintiff filed the suit wherein cause of action have been stated to have arose on the dismissal of the said proceeding and, therefore, it is necessary to bring the order on the record and in fact, the photocopy of the order is available on the record but the learned Court below refused to mark the said document as exhibit in the case. From perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the petitioner’s evidence has already been closed as far back as on 20.08.2007 and the case is pending for final hearing. The order produced by the petitioner is not certified copy. It is well settled principles of law 2 that the proceeding under Section 144 Cr.P.C. itself expired after expiry of 60 days. Further, in my opinion, in a Civil suit, for declaration of title, the order passed under Section 144 Cr.P.C. is not so very material so as to prejudice either of the parties. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and the observation made by the learned Court below that the suit is at the stage of hearing, in my opinion, it is not a fit case where jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is required to be exercised. Thus, this writ application is dismissed. Saurabh (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)