IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.7736 of 2007 ***** Ashok Sah son of Jagdish Sah, resident of village- Bhathawa P.S. Kuchaikote, District Gopalganj. …. …. Petitioner Versus 1. State of Bihar. 2. Shiv Bachan Sah son of Bindeshwari Sah. 3. Hira Lal Sah. 4. Munna Sah No.3 and 4 are sons of Shiv Bachan Sah, resident of village- Bhathawa Parsurampur P.S. Kuchaikote, District Gopalganj. …. …. Opposite parties ----------- 6. 2.4.2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as A.P.P. for the State. Despite valid service of notice there is no representation on behalf of private opposite party no. 2 to 4. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the proceeding initially initiated under Section 144 of Cr.P.C. later on converted under Section 145 by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Gopalganj is totally misconceived and the same has been illegally upheld by the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Gopalganj in his order dated 26.5.2006 in Cri. Rev. No. 342 of 2002/33 of 2004. Petitioner on the basis of the assertion made in the said application submitted that it is a matter where a partition suit was initially filed bearing 226/99. The parties filed a compromise petition and based on the compromise petition a decree was passed by the Court of Sub-Judge-II, Gopalganj. It seems that the said decree did not satisfy opposite party no.3, namely, Hira Lal Sah, who instead of challenging the same got a proceeding under Section 144 initiated which was mechanically converted into 145 by the Sub Divisional Magistrate on the ground that in a summary proceeding under Section 144 it would not - 2 - be possible to decide the issue. Submission of learned counsel is that it is out and out civil dispute in which there is already a declaration of a competent court and if any party was aggrieved by the said the answer does not lie in a proceeding under Section 144 or 145 Cr.P.C. After going through the records, arguments and the evidence the Court is satisfied that the submission made on behalf of the petitioner that the origin of dispute is the basis of declaration by a Court of competent jurisdiction. If any party was aggrieved by the same the answer lay by moving the superior court and not by invoking a proceeding under Section 144 Cr.P.C. and that converted into 145 in a very cursory manner. The application is allowed. The order dated 26.5.2006 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Gopalganj in Cri. Rev. No. 342 of 2002/33 of 2004 as well as the order dated 10.9.2002 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Gopalganj in M. Case No.796/02 are set aside and quashed. Pawan/- (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)