IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.54523 of 2007 RAJESHWAR SAH,SON OF LATE DHANPAT SAH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-MAHAMMADPUR LALSE, P.S. SAKRA, DISTRICT- MUZAFFARPUR……………………………………………PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. BINOD SAH, SON OF RAJESHWAR SAH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-MAHAMMADPUR LALSE, P.S. SAKRA, DISTRICT- MUZAFFARPUR. 3. RAM ASHISH SAHANI. 4. VISHWANATH SAHANI. BOTH ARE SONS OF LATE RUDAL SAHANI. 5. KISHORE SAHANI, SON OF VISHWANATH SAHANI. ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE-SIMARA, P.S. PEAR, DISTRICT-MUZAFFARPUR. ………………………………………………….OPPOSITE PARTIES. ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Arbind Kumar Verma, Advocate. For the State : Mr. R.B.S. Pahepuri, A.P.P. ------------ 2. 19.2.2009. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The grievance of the petitioner is against the order dated 26.4.2007 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate(East), Muzaffarpur, in Case No.P.773 of 2006, whereby he has dropped the proceeding under Section 144 Cr.P.C. The submission advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner who happens to be the second party in the aforesaid proceeding is that since the first party had wrongly initiated a proceeding under Section 144 Cr.P.C. against them and when the court came to a finding that there is no apprehension of breach of peace the court ought to have taken action against the first party under - 2 - Section 182 read with Section 211 I.P.C. for having instituted a false and frivolous case. It is unfortunate that such orders or directions which are sought for by the learned counsel for the petitioner do not fall within the ambit or exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Even otherwise, this application by itself appears to be an exercise in futility, vexatious amounting to harassing the other side. Such frivolous petition cannot be entertained in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The application is accordingly dismissed with costs quantified Rs.500/-. P.S. (Abhijit Sinha,J)