IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.515 of 2009 1. ZAMINDAR PAL @ JIMDAR PAL SON OF LATE MUNGA PAL 2. SUDAMA PAL SON OF ZAMINDAR PAL BOTH RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE NAWADIH, P.S.- INDRAPURI, DISTRICT- ROHTAS. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. OSIER PAL SON OF LATE MUNGA PAL, R/O- VILLAGE NAWADIH, P.S.- INDRAPURI, DISTRICT- ROHTAS For the petitioners : Mr. Kamal Kumar Sinha, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Binod Kumar APP ----------- 2 08.11.2010 Petitioners are the second party to the proceeding initiated under Section 147 Cr.P.C.. They are aggrieved by order dated 19.3.2009 passed on Cr. Rev. no. 50/2009 (Zamindar Pal & Others versus State of Bihar & Ors.) whereby revision preferred by them has been considered and dismissed observing as under: “During the proceeding the 2nd party who are petitioners filed their written statement on 10.4.2006 and hearing was done on 28.7.2006 on the point of maintainability of the case. The witnesses were examined during the proceeding. It came from the mouth of the witnesses that the lane is 25 feet in length and 7 feet wide which has been blocked by the petitioner Jamindar Pal. It has also come in the evidence that the first party Osier Pal (O.P. no. 2) has become helpless due to the blocking of the passage leading to his house by Jamindar Pal. Not only the family members of Osier Pal who had been enjoying the right of easement over the lane but also the cattle of Osier Pal has been made to suffer by the illegal act of Jamindar Pal erecting wall over the lane. It appears from the evidence that the land is under dispute. The impugned order dated 10.2.2009 passed by the learned S.D.M. has been fully discussed and after analyzing the evidence of the witnesses the learned S.D.M. has rightly come to the conclusion that the members of the first party of the proceeding namely Osier Pal has right to use the lane described above.” It appears that on an application filed by the first party 2 (opposite party), a proceeding was initiated in respect of lane measuring 25 ft in length and 8 ft in width which was allegedly blocked by the second party (petitioners). Learned Magistrate allowed the parties to lead evidence and also called for a report from the concerned police station. On a consideration of the report as also the evidence adduced by the parties, learned Court below has found that there existed a lane which was being used by the parties and the opposite party blocked the said lane by constructing wall. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have constructed their wall on their plot being plot no. 804 of khata no. 213 measuring an area of 1.5. decimals. It is next submitted that a title suit being Title Suit no. 2000/2009 has already filed by the petitioners herein in which the opposite party has already appeared and filed his written statement. This is precisely a question of fact which the Trial Court has considered in the light of the evidence both documentary and oral brought on record by the parties. In my view, no case for interference in the order impugned has been made out. The application is dismissed. pkj ( Kishore K. Mandal, J. )