Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:41889-DB Court No. - 29 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2004 of 2025 Petitioner :- Deena Nath Maurya Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd. Shahanshah Khan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J. Hon'ble Donadi Ramesh,J. This petition has been filed with the allegation that without there being any dispute in existence in respect of the land of the petitioner the police personnel are not allowing the petitioner to cut the standing crops. Taking note of such contention we invited instructions from the respondents on 17.2.2025. Further time was granted on the last date. Pursuant to said orders the State counsel has placed instructions of the respondent-authority which is taken on record. The concerned Inspector of Police Station has intimated that though the petitioner has made a complaint that one Ramawati has no concern with the Plot No.1627 over which the petitioner is recorded and that his plot is at a distance of 2 km but under her influence the authorities are not permitting the petitioner to cut his standing crops. However, alongwith the instructions the respondents have placed on record the sale deed executed in favour of Ramawati, who is also recorded over the part of same plot i.e. 1627M. It is stated that there is a dispute with regard to ownership over the property in question and merely with an intent to mislead this Court a false assertion is made that the land of Ramawati is at a distance of 2 km. Learned counsel for the petitioner has attempted to justify the petitioner's stand by saying that petitioner is recorded over plot no.1627, whereas Ramawati is recorded over the part of land of plot no.1627M. Even if plot no.1627 is a minzumla number yet, we refuse to believe that the plot would be so big that it would be at a distance of 2 km. In the facts of the case, we find that the petitioner has not approached this Court with clean hands and has suppressed the fact that there exists a civil dispute between him and Ramawati. Such dispute of possession or title over the immovable property can be examined by the competent civil court. In view of the stand taken by the respondents that they have otherwise not created any obstructions we refuse to interfere in the present writ petition. We also deprecate filing of the writ petition by the present petitioner by making false allegation. Since the petitioner is a villager, we do not proceed with any action against him for misleading the Court. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed with cost assessed at Rs.100/-. If such amount is not deposited within a month the District Magistrate, Mirzapur is directed to recover such amount from the petitioner. Order Date :- 21.3.2025 RA Digitally signed by :- RAZIQ ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad