IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5357 of 2009 JAWAHAR JHA son of Moti Lal Jha, resident of Village Asouta P.S. Rajaun,Dist.Banka-petitioner Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.The District Magistrate, Banka 3.The Sub Divisional Officer, Banka 4.The Circle Officer, Amarpur,Dist.Banka 5.The Superintendent of Police, Banka 6.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Banka 7.The Officer-in-charge, Amarpur Police Station Banka 8.Mankar Rai, son of late Darbari Rai 9.Munna Rai, son of late Darbari Rai 10.Tesu Rai, son of late Baijnath Rai 11.Bijay Rai, son of late Chandar Rai 12.Upendra Rai, son of late Chandar Rai 13.Haldhar Rai, son of late Mahabir Rai 14.Uday Rai, son of Haldhar Rai 15.Mahesh Rai, son of late Chutar Rai 16.Bheem Rai, son of late Poshan Rai 17.Arun Rai, son of late Shravan Rai 18.Kishori Rai, son of late Baijnath Rai 19.Anant Ram Rai, son of late Karu Rai 20.Darshan Rai, son of late Karu Rai 21.Siya Ram Rai, son of Darshan Rai 22.Jitendra Rai, son of Anant Ram Rai 23.Lakshman Rai, son of late Manchan Rai 24.Arjun Rai, son of late Poshan Rai 25.Kaleshwar Rai, son of late Khago Rai 26.Ghanshyam Rai, son of late Bino Rai 27.Govind Rai, son of late Bino Rai 28.Kailash Rai, son of late Gujar Rai 29.Rajendra Rai, son of late Sitabi Rai 30.Bhudev Rai, son of late Rameshwar Rai All residents of village Chokar P.S.Amarpur District Banka---------------------respondents ----------- For the petitioner :Mrs. Pallavi Mishra For the State :Mr.Ray Shivaji Nath,AAG IV ---- 2. 28.4.2009 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had approached the authorities to start a proceeding under Section 144 Cr.P.C. with respect to the land of the 2 petitioner which has been grabbed by private respondents nos. 8 to 30 and the said facts are also supported by the report dated 22.3.2009 of the Sub Inspector of Amarpur Police Station submitted to the Sub Divisional Officer, Banka in which he has recommended that a proceeding under Section 144 Cr.P.C. should be started in the matter but nothing is being done by the authorities. It is submitted that earlier also a proceeding under Section 144 Cr.P.C. was initiated at the instance of the private respondents but the same was dropped by order dated 3.3.2009 stating that it was a matter which can be considered and decided only by the civil courts, without looking into the documents filed by the petitioner showing the continuous possession since 1922 and without converting the proceeding into one under Section 145 Cr.P.C. for deciding the possession as orally requested by the petitioner. In the aforesaid view of the matter, the writ application is disposed of with the observation that the Sub-Divisional Officer shall consider the petition filed by the 3 petitioner for initiating a proceeding under Section 144 Cr.P.C. and/or converting the same into a proceeding under Section 145 Cr.P.C. after examining the factual aspects on the basis of whatever reports which are on the record or any other report that he may call for. (Ramesh Kumar Datta,J.) spal/