IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.25055 of 2008 KHAKHAN YADAV, SON OF LATE BILAT YADAV, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BARDAHI TOLA BHANPUR, P.S. BABU BARHI, DISTRICT MADHUBANI. ---- PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. RAM NARAYAN YADAV, SON OF KHUSHI LAL YADAV, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BHANPUR, P.S. BABU BARHI, DISTRICT MADHUBANI. ---- OPPOSITE PARTIES ----------- 2 18.3.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State. This application has been filed challenging the order dated, 30.8.2007 passed in M.R. No. 650 of 2007 and the order of the Revisional Court dated 15.2.2008 passed in Cr. Rev. No. 1034 of 2007. The proceeding under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has lapsed and as such nothing need be said on that issue. However, the petitioner is aggrieved by the findings of the S.D.M., Sadar, Madhubani wherein he has referred to the documents of the first party and second party and held that claim of the first party over the disputed land appears to be on a better footing than that of the second party. It is well settled that a Court while proceeding in a matter under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can only consider whether there is eminent danger of disturbance of peace and in a proceeding under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure consider the question of possession. The Court should refrain itself from commenting upon the merits of the document especially in a proceeding under 2 Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. That part of the order should be ignored and it will not be considered to be finding of a Court in future litigation to be used in favour or against any party. This application is allowed. Sanjay (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)