IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1550 of 2008 RAM BALAK SINGH SON OF LATE DWARIKA SINGH, R/O- VILLAGE- SHEKHOPUR DIH, P.S.- SHEKHOPUR SARAI, DISTRICT- SHEIKHPURA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. AKHILESHWARI SINGH, SON OF KAPILDEO SINGH 3. BHUSHAN SINGH, SON OF KAPILDEO SINGH 4. SUDHIR SINGH, SON OF KAPILDEO SINGH 5. DEVENDRA SINGH, SON OF KAPILDEO SINGH 6. SHRAWAN KUMAR, SON OF KAPILDEO SINGH 7. CHANDAN KUMAR, SON OF BINDESHWARI SINGH ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE SHEKHOPUR DIH, P.S.- SHEKHOPUR SARAI, DISTRICT- SHEIKHPURA For the petitioner :Mr. Pramod Kumar Sinha no. 1, Advocate For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP ----------- 3 23.08.2010 Heard both sides. Petitioner constitutes first party to Section 107 Cr.P.C. proceeding. He is aggrieved by order dated 18.8.2008 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Munger in Cr. Rev. no. 222 of 2008 (Sudhir Singh versus The State of Bihar& Ors.). It appears that learned Magistrate on a consideration of the materials placed before it, by order dated 2.11.2007 directed both the parties to execute bond for maintaining peace. It is admitted position that the petitioner executed the bond period whereof has already expired. The grievance is that the second party to the said proceeding did not comply with the said order. They moved before learned revisional Court for setting aside of the said order which has been allowed. The petitioner has no grievance so far the present proceeding concerns him. It is contended that the second party obtained the order of the revisional court dated 18.8.2008 on suppression of fact. It is 2 stated that the life of the proceeding was already extended by the learned Magistrate. A perusal of the order dated 18.8.2008 indicates that the aforesaid factum was before the Court which was considered by the learned revisional court. In view of the position that they have already complied with the order of the learned Magistrate by executing bonds, period whereof have already expired, this court is not inclined to interfere with the order. The application is dismissed. Since I have considered the case on merit, the issue of limitation pales into insignificance. pkj ( Kishore K. Mandal, J. )