Judgment U. P. Singh, J. 1. With consent of the parties, this application is being disposed of at the admission stage. 2. This is an application under Sec.482 of the Code of Criminal procedure for quashing the ex parte order of the Executive Magistrate, Ranchi, dated 11-12-1985 passed in Case No.3157 of 1985 under Sec.145 of the code of Criminal Procedure (in short, the Code ). 3. The brief statement of the facts of this case will show that it is n gross case of misuse of power under Sec.145 of the Code. It is not disputed, that by a decree of the Civil Court, the title and possession over the disputed properties had been finally concluded in favour of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the said decree, opposite-party No.2 adopted a dubious method to disturb the possession of the petitioner and filed an application on 30-11-1983 when the first proceeding under Sec.145 of the Code was drawn-up. The said application was dismissed by the Executive Magistrate on the ground that there was no apprehension of the breach of peace to justify the initiation of the proceeding under Sec.145 of the Code. Within ten days, thereafter, another application was filed by opposite-party No.2 and his brothers before the Sub-divisional magistrate on the same allegations and over the same property. On 10-12-1983, the Sub-divisional Magistrate then initiated a proceeding under Sec.145 of the Code in respect of the same land in question. This was the second order under Sec.145 of the Code. In reply, the petitioner filed an application for dropping the said proceeding but that application was rejected. The petitioner then filed a revision application before the Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi, and it was allowed. The result was that the second proceeding drawn up on 10-12-1983 by the Executive Magistrate was also quashed on 2-12-1985 and the proceeding was dropped. Within four days thereafter, opposite party No.2 again filed an application and this was the third application, rspeating the same allegations over the same property, requesting for starting a fresh proceeding under section 145 of the Code. On this application, the Sub-divisional Magistrate passed the impugned order starting a proceeding under Sec.145 of the Code and issued notice to the petitioner to submit their written statement etc. 4. On this application, the Sub-divisional Magistrate passed the impugned order starting a proceeding under Sec.145 of the Code and issued notice to the petitioner to submit their written statement etc. 4. It is not disputed, that the petitioner and his predecessors-in-interest were in continuous possession of the land in question and the dispute as against the opposite-party had been finally concluded by a decree of the Civil Court. Repeated applications for drawing up a proceeding under Sec.145 of the code was unwarranted. The Magistrate did not apply his mind properly and acted illegally in starting the proceeding under Sec.145 of the Code between the same parties and over the same property for the third time. Repeated applications, one after the other, for the same cause of action over the same property between the same parties could not be entertained, when the dispute in respect of the title and possession had been concluded by a decree of the Civil court. Entertaining such repeated applications for initiation of 145 proceedings would then be an endless affair and instead of giving lawful protection to a person, whose title and possession has been declared by a Civil Court, the authorities will be causing harassment and disturbing the peaceful enjoyment of the right, title and interest of such persons in the property at the instance of those who remained unsuccessful in court. There cannot be any better example of gross abuse of the process of the Court as has been presently done by the Executive magistrate. 5. Therefore, in the interest of justice. I quash the impugned order dated 11-12-1985 and award cost against opposite-party No.2. The application is, accordingly, allowed with costs. Application allowed.