2025:JHHC:16458 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI WP(Cr.) No.384 of 2025 ----- Mukesh Kumar Chauhan @ Mukesh Chauhan, son of Natwarlal Chauhan, resident of Gujrati Colony, near Ghatshila Railway Station, PO and PS Ghatshila, District Singhbhum East … Petitioner(s). Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.District Magistrate cum Dy. Commissioner, East Singhbhum, Collectorate, PO and PS Bistupur, East Singhbhum 3.Senior Superintendent of Police, Collectorate, PO and PS Bistupur, East Singhbhum 4.Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Ghatshila 5.Officer In-Charge, Ghatshila Police Station, East Singhbhum 6.Mohammad Farooque, son of Mohammad Giyasuddin, resident of Muslim Bastee, Ghatshila, East Singhbhum … Respondents. CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. P.A.S. Pati, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Saurav Mahto, AC to GP-I …...... 04 /20.06.2025: The petitioner in this writ petition has made the following prayers: (i) quashing the notice dated 04.12.2024 and proceedings in connection with Misc. Case No. 387/2024 initiated u/s 163 BNSS, 2023 issued by the respondent no. 4, in connection with the land and details of which has been mentioned in the aforesaid notice as Mouza Pawara, Thana No. 112, Khata No. 247, Plot No. 944 (Part), Area not mentioned. (ii) Upon quashing the aforesaid proceedings be pleased to direct the respondents particularly respondent nos. 5 and 6 not to interfere with the peaceful possession of the petitioner over the said property/piece of land as mentioned in the notice dated 04.12.2024. The case is pending in the court of learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, East Singhbhum. 2. From the very numbering and year of the case, it is clear that the proceeding under section 163 of BNSS was initiated in the year, 2024. 3. Section 163 of BNSS reads as follows: “163. Power to issue order in urgent cases of nuisance or apprehended danger.— (1) In cases where, in the opinion of a District Magistrate, a Sub- divisional Magistrate or any other Executive Magistrate specially empowered by the State Government in this behalf, there is sufficient ground for proceeding under this section and immediate prevention or speedy remedy is desirable, such Magistrate may, by a written order stating the material facts of the case and served in the manner provided by section 153, direct any person to abstain from a certain act 2025:JHHC:16458 2 or to take certain order with respect to certain property in his possession or under his management, if such Magistrate considers that such direction is likely to prevent, or tends to prevent, obstruction, annoyance or injury to any person lawfully employed, or danger to human life, health or safety or a disturbance of the public tranquillity, or a riot, or an affray. (2) An order under this section may, in cases of emergency or in cases where the circumstances do not admit of the serving in due time of a notice upon the person against whom the order is directed, be passed ex parte. (3) An order under this section may be directed to a particular individual, or to persons residing in a particular place or area, or to the public generally when frequenting or visiting a particular place or area. (4) No order under this section shall remain in force for more than two months from the making thereof: Provided that if the State Government considers it necessary so to do for preventing danger to human life, health or safety or for preventing a riot or any affray, it may, by notification, direct that an order made by a Magistrate under this section shall remain in force for such further period not exceeding six months from the date on which the order made by the Magistrate would have, but for such order, expired, as it may specify in the said notification. (5) Any Magistrate may, either on his own motion or on the application of any person aggrieved, rescind or alter any order made under this section by himself or any Magistrate subordinate to him or by his predecessor-in-office. (6) The State Government may, either on its own motion or on the application of any person aggrieved, rescind or alter any order made by it under the proviso to sub-section (4). (7) Where an application under sub-section (5) or sub-section (6) is received, the Magistrate, or the State Government, as the case may be, shall afford to the applicant an early opportunity of appearing before him or it, either in person or by an advocate and showing cause against the order; and if the Magistrate or the State Government, as the case may be, rejects the application wholly or in part, he or it shall record in writing the reasons for so doing.” 4. Today, we are in the month of June, 2025. This clearly suggest that more than 60 days have already lapsed from the initiation of the proceeding. The proceeding is deemed to have lapsed, so it cannot be said that legally the said proceeding which was initiated vide Misc. Case No. 387 of 2024 is still continuing. 5. Since the entire proceeding under section 163 of BNSS has died its natural death no order can be passed in this case. 6. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Tanuj/