Criminal Miscellaneous No.10256 OF 1992 In the matter of an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure --------- SK. MUJIBUR RAHMAN, Son of Late Sk. Abdul Majeed, resident of Babhnaul, P.O. Babhnaul, P.S.Dawath, District-Rohtas ---- PETITIONER Versus 1. JANAB NOORUL AMIN, Son of Late Sk.Quddus. 2. Janab Aftab Alam, Son of Sk. Jamaluddin 3. Janab Faiyaz Ansari , Son of Fazlur Rahman Ansari 4. Janab Sk. Sarajuddin Ahmad, Son of Sk. Amiruddin 5. Janab Faridul Haque Khan, Son of Farullah Khan 6. Janab Shah Zaman Khan, Son of Sikandar Zaman Khan 7. Janab Sk. Shakil , Father’s name not known to the petitioner 8. Janab Samiuddin alias Chhoti, Son of Sk. Majeed 9. Chhota Maulvi Mansoori, father’s named not known to the petitioner All residents of at and P.O. Babhnaul, P.S. Dawath, District-Rohtas 10. The State of Bihar. --------- Opp.Parties. ---------- For the petitioner : Sri S.K.Mishra & Ms.Sushmita Mishra, Advocates For the State : Sri Pramod Kumar Pandey -------- P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR Rakesh Kumar, J The sole petitioner aggrieved with the order dated 27.5.1992 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Bikramganj in Case No.129(M) /92 has approached this Court by filing the present petition. By the order dated 14.8.1992, while issuing notice to the Opp.Party nos. 1 to 9, this Court had directed that in the meantime , the petitioner shall not be dispossessed pursuant to the impugned order dated 27.5.1992, operation whereof is stayed. Subsequently, on 17.9.1993, this application was admitted for hearing. While admitting the case, this Court directed that the interim order will continue in the meantime and 2 till date interim order of stay is continuing. On 27.5.1992, the learned Magistrate had passed an order of attachment. Despite the fact that this Court had issued direction for staying the impugned order vide order dated 14.8.1992 it appears that the petitioner was prevented by the concerned Magistrate from the removing the paddy crop , which was harvested on the land in question by the petitioner. Accordingly, by order dated 11.12.1992, this Court directed the Magistrate to release the crop in favour of the petitioner. In view of order dated 11.12.1992, the impugned order, i.e. 27.5.1992 had become inoperative. So far as the dispute regarding possession over the land in question is concerned, since the matter had remained pending for about 18 years, it would not be appropriate for this Court to record a finding. These matters can well be examined in a civil suit. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of. Patna High Court,Patna Dated: the 1st April,2010 Nawal Kishore Singh/N.A.F.R. (Rakesh Kumar, J)