IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.31831 of 2009 Chandrabati Devi wife of Sri Bindeshwar Pandit resident of village Mahua Singh Rai, P.S. Mahua (Anchal Mahua) District Vaishali Versus 1. State of Bihar 2. Bankelal Bihari Pandit son of Late Shivlal Pandit resident of village, Mahua Singh Rai, P.S. Mahua (Anchal Mahua) District Vaishali. ---------------------------------- 2 19.12.2011 Heard Mr. Anish Chandra, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 11.05.2009 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur in Cri. Revision No. 49 of 2009 whereby the learned Court below while dismissing the application has given liberty to the petitioner to file an appropriate application before the learned Magistrate for withdrawing the attachment order passed under Section 146(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code in relation to the suit property and upon such application being filed, the learned Magistrate was directed to dispose of the same by a reasoned order. It so appears that a proceeding had been initiated at the instance of the opposite party No.2 before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Mahua in the District of Vaishali under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with respect to the land bearing Khata No. 276 Khesra No. 3466 having an area of 58 1/2 decimals , the land bearing Khata No. 276 Khesra No.3509 having an area of 4 decimals and Khesra No. 3545 and 3548 having an area of 50 decimals and khesra No. 3498 and 4399 having an area of 13 decimals situated in village Mahua Singhrai P.S. Mahua in the District of Vaishali. The 2 learned Magistrate upon consideration of the written statement filed on behalf of the respective parties came to a conclusion that the second party i.e. present petitioner were attempting to change the physical feature of the suit property and thus leading to apprehension of breach of peace between the parties. The learned Magistrate in the said circumstances issued order for attachment of property under Section 146(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Officer-in- charge, Mahua was appointed as a receiver of the property in order to maintain the law and order situation. The petitioner who is the second party before the learned Magistrate being aggrieved by the order dated 26.02.2009 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Mahua preferred a criminal revision giving rise to Cri. Revision No. 49 of 2009 and the learned District and Sessions Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur upon consideration of the materials and the submissions of the parties was pleased to dismiss the revision application but not before issuing appropriate directions to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate to dispose of the proceeding within a period of six months, failing which the petitioner was granted liberty to file an appropriate application before the learned Magistrate for withdrawing the attachment order. The petitioner instead of taking recourse to the liberty afforded to him under orders of the learned District and Sessions Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur which order though being in the nature of an order of dismissal nonetheless directed the concerned Magistrate to conclude the proceedings within a period of six months failing which the petitioner was afforded liberty to make appropriate prayer for 3 withdrawal of the attachment order, has chosen to file the present application, thus lingering the proceeding for a period of more than two years, before this Court. Considering the liberty granted to the petitioner by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur in the order impugned, no cause for interference is called for in the same. The application is dismissed. Bibhash (Jyoti Saran, J.)