IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLREV No.266 of 2025 Bodala Venkata Ramana @ Ravanayya …. Petitioners Mr. B. Tripathy, Advocate -Versus- Manubala Venugopal …. Opposite Party Mr. M.K. Panda, Advocate CORAM: MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK Order No. ORDER 28.07.2025 02. 1. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. Instant revision is filed challenging the impugned order dated 28th March, 2025 as at Annexure-4 passed in MC No.01 of 2025 by learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Gajapati, Paralakhemundi on the grounds stated. 3. Mr. Panda, learned counsel for the opposite party submits that the matter has become infructuous since the impugned order i.e. Annexure-4 was valid for two months only in view of Section 163(4) of BNSS. In reply and response to the above, Mr. Tripathy, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that learned court below restrained both the sides and granted the liberty to the opposite party only to approach the civil court since the dispute to be civil in nature. It is claimed that the possession of the petitioner vis-à-vis case land is disturbed in the hands of the opposite party. But considering the fact that an order under Section 163(4) of BNSS is to continue and remain in force for two months from the date of such order passed, accepting the submission of Mr. Panda, learned counsel for the opposite party, it is to be held that the matter has become infructuous but at the same time, the conclusion is that if in case the possession of the petitioner over in respect of the case land is disturbed by the opposite party, he is equally at liberty to approach the civil court. Having said that, the Court is of the view that no further direction is necessary dealing with the revision. 4. As a result, the revision stands disposed of with the observation as aforesaid. 5. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per rules. (R.K. Pattanaik) Judge TUDU