Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:22273 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION DEFECTIVE No. - 170 of 2025 Revisionist :- Manju Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 6 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Arvind Kumar Gautam,Abhishek Yadav,Virendra Kumar Bhasker Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. (CMA No. 1 of 2025-Application for Condonation of Delay) 1. Office has reported that this criminal revision has been filed with delay of 83 days. 2. Heard on the application for condonation of delay. 3. For the reasons as stated in the accompanying affidavit filed in support of the delay condonation application, delay is condoned. 4. Delay condonation application is allowed. 5. The criminal revision is treated to be filed within time. (Order on Revision) 1. Heard Shri Arvind Kumar Gautam, learned counsel for revisionist, learned A.G.A.for the State and perused the material available on record. 2. In view of the proposed order notice to private opposite parties is dispensed with. 3. By means of the present revision under Section 438/442 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (397/401 Cr.P.C.), the revisionist has challenged the order dated 16.10.2024 passed by learned Sub Divisional Magistrate, Hardoi whereby he has disposed of the application preferred by the revisionist under Section 145 Cr.P.C. and with the consent of parties has provided that the easementary rights of the revisionist shall continue on Gata No. 1499 as was being done previously and further recorded the fact that the dispute ought to be settled by the court of competent jurisdiction in accordance with law. and has consigned the said application to records. 4 Learned counsel for revisionist submits that the revisionist is the owner of the Gata No. 1501, which was purchased by the revisionist on 13.03.2023 while adjacent to the said plot is a temple and along with the said temple is the land of the private opposite parties situated at Gata No. 1500. It is the case of the revisionist that the revisionist was using the land next to the temple for ingress and egress for his plot but the same road has been blocked by the private opposite parties and consequently moved an application under Section 145 Cr.P.C. The Sub Divisional Magistrate on receiving the said application had called for a report from the police and allegations of the revisionist was found to be correct and accordingly had passed an interim order in favour of the revisionist. Subsequently a report was also sought from the Naib Tehsildar Bilgram, who indicated that the land on which the revisionist seeking the road is a Bhumidhari land of the private opposite parties therein. Apart from which it was further stated that there is no chak-marg on the said land, the benefit of which could be given to the revisionist. After considering the aforesaid facts, the Sub Divisional Magistrate by means of impugned order dated 16.10.2024 has consigned the matter to records and with the consent of all the parties has further recorded that the parties shall continue to use the road situated at Gata No. 1499 for ingress and egress from the plot of the revisionist. 5. Learned counsel for revisionist has fairly submitted that a suit has been preferred by the revisionist for injunction in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), (East) Hardoi with regard to the said dispute but till date unable to have the matter listed and the application for injunction is still pending consideration. 6. Learned counsel for revisionist has submitted that the grievance of the revisionist shall be substantially redress in case the trial court is directed to consider the application for injunction with expedition. 7. Learned A.G.A. for the State does not oppose the prayer made by the revisionist. 8. Accordingly, considering the impugned order dated 16.10.2024, this Court does not find any infirmity with the same, inasmuch as, the Sub Divisional Magistrate has noticed the fact that the dispute can be decided by the court of competent jurisdiction and with the consent of parties during such period Gata No. 1499 has been given for ingress and egress of the revisionist. 9. Be that as it may, this revision is disposed of with the direction to the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) (East), Hardoi to consider and decide the application of the revisionist for injunction with expedition without giving any unnecessary adjournment. 10. Learned counsel for revisionist undertakes to appear in the matter on all dates fixed and will not seek any unnecessary adjournment. 11. With the aforesaid observations/directions, this revision is disposed of. . (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 21.4.2025 Virendra Digitally signed by :- VIRENDRA KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench