Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 109450 (ALL)

MAN SINGH v. State of UP AND 3 OTHERS

A227/15140/2024 · 2025-01-21

Saurabh Srivastava

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:11580 Court No. - 79 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 15140 of 2024 Petitioner :- Man Singh Respondent :- State Of Up And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Akhil Ranjan Counsel for Respondent :- Anand Pal Singh,G.A.,Harish Chandra Singh Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Sri Akhil Ranjan, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Anand Pal Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.2 as well as learned AGA. 2. By means of present petition, petitioner has challenged order dated 22.05.2024 passed by learned Additional Session Judge/FTC-II, Kushinagar at Padrauna in Criminal Revision No.166 of 2023 (Man Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others) as well as order dated 09.08.2023 passed by Sub-Divisional Magistrate Hata, Kushinagar in Case No.3831 of 2023 (Girijesh Vs. Man Singh and others), under Section 146(1) Cr.P.C., Police Station Ahirauli Bazar, District Kushinagar. 3. Brief facts of the present case are that proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C. has been initiated at the behest of application preferred by respondent no.2 which culminated into order dated 09.08.2023 through which plot no.146 measuring about 0.684 hectare and plot no.288 measuring about 0.291 hectare, situated at Village Sakhauli, P.S. Ahirauli Bazar, Tehsil Hata, District Kushinagar have been attached. Being aggrieved with the order dated 09.08.2023, petitioner preferred Criminal Revision No.166 of 2023 (Man Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another) with the specific averment that as per the family settlement, petitioner including his mother who is residing at his native place i.e. Kushinagar and his two brothers residing at different places, one is residing at Chandigarh and another one lives in abroad for their livelihood, all are having equal share over the property pertains to them. It is the petitioner who alongwith his mother, is taking care of the entire property. The allegation whatsoever has been put forward through the application preferred at the behest of respondent no.2 under Section 145 Cr.P.C. that his share has been illegally taken into possession by petitioner through which there is a permanent threat prevailing over the property in dispute and it is the respondent no.2 who is not in position to take possession of the same for his own use. 4. Learned counsel for respondent no.2 submitted that over the application preferred at the behest of respondent no.2 under Section 145 Cr.P.C., a report was called from the concerned police station through which, the allegation has been found proved and thereafter in consideration to the report, plot no.146 and plot no.288 have been legally attached and there is hardly any infirmity in the orders impugned. 5. After having the rival contentions raised by learned counsel for parties, one thing is crystal clear that both the plots are having joint measurement of near about four bighas i.e. near about 1 hectare, the family settlement which has been appended alongwith the present petition, has been duly disputed by respondent no.2 but at the same time, presuming the entire measurement of the property in dispute, respondent no.2 is legally entitlement of 1/4th share of the entire property which is not more than one bigha. 6. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, order dated 22.05.2024 passed by learned Additional Session Judge/FTC-II, Kushinagar at Padrauna and order dated 09.08.2023 passed by Sub-Divisional Magistrate Hata, Kushinagar, are hereby modified to the extent to attach 1/4th share of respondent no.2 from both the said plots. The attachment proceedings be initiated as fresh by way excluding 2/3rd portion of plot nos.146 and 288 in favour of petitioner and respondent nos.3 and 4 till disposal of proceedings initiated in pursuance to Case No.3831 of 2023 (Girijesh Vs. Man Singh and others), under Section 146(1) Cr.P.C.. 7. Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of. 8. However, it is made clear that this order will not preclude from release of 1/4th share of the property in favour of respondent no.2. Order Date :- 21.1.2025 Vivek Kr. Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad