IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.43682 of 2007 UMASHANKAR PANDEY S/O LATE RAM JANAM PANDEY, R/O VILLAGE- GHOGHIA, PS- MOHANIA, DISTT- KAIMUR AT BHABUA--------PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. SHEO KUER PASI S/O LATE JAGARDEO PASI 3. RAM PYARE PASI S/O SHEO KUER PASI 4. MANOJ PASI S/O SHOE KUER PASI 5. ARBIND PASI S/O SHEO KUER PASI 6. SUDAMA PANDEY S/O LATE MAGHU PANDEY, ALL R/O VILLAGE- GHEGHIA, PS- MOHANIA, DISTT- KAIMUR AT BHABUA--- ------ ------------------------OPPOSITE PARTIES ----------- 5 15.4.2009 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Order dated 7.6.2007 passed by Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Mohania district of Kaimur in Case No. 822 of 2005 is the subject matter of challenge in the present case. The short submission made on behalf of the petitioner is that after an earlier order dated 9.5.2007passed by Sub-Divisional Magistrate in a proceeding under section 107 of the Cr. P. C. there was no occasion for him thereafter to pass yet another order dropping the proceeding and holding that the same has become time barred. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that even if the earlier part of the order was bad then it was open to the opposite parties to challenge the same before the appropriate forum. But if the order dated 7.6.2007 is allowed to stand it will amount to permitting review of the earlier order by the court concerned which it is not empowered to do more so in a criminal proceeding. Learned counsel representing the opposite parties submits that the order had to be passed by the Magistrate when he - 2 - came to know the legal position and to that extent net effect of the order is in consonance with the law. Submission made on behalf of the opposite parties is fit to be rejected on the sole ground that it is not open to the Magistrate in question to correct the illegal/erroneous order which has come to be passed on the earlier day which was dated 9.5.2007. Allowing the order dated 7.6.2007 to stay would amount to review of earlier order impermissible in law and to that extent the petitioner has made out a case for interference. The order dated 7.6.2007 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Mohania in Case no. 822 of 2005 stands quashed. Needless to record that the effect of quashing order dated 7.6.2007 will be analysed by the Magistrate with regard to legality of the enforcement of the order in question in the changed circumstances. This application is allowed. RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J.)