HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 12190 of 2025 Court No. - 89 HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Amrit Raj, learned AGA for the State are present. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed for a direction to set aside the order dated 22.02.2015/22.12.2015 passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Khajani, Gorakhpur in case no.75/T-20150531023080 of 2015 and to set aside order dated 23.06.2025 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (P.C. Act), Court no. 3, Gorakhpur in criminal revision no. 84 of 2024. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C. were initiated on an application filed by respondent Nos. 2 and 3 before the learned SDM, Khajani, District Gorakhpur, alleging that the petitioner was attempting to take illegal possession of their agricultural land bearing Gata No. 62, admeasuring 1.95 acres. It was further submitted that, pursuant to the said application, the learned SDM called for a police report. The police report revealed that the disputed land had been jointly purchased by the petitioner and the respondents through a common sale deed and that all of them are co-sharers in the said land. It was also mentioned in the police report that Partition Suit No. 163/11 (Vidhyadhar vs. Gulam Ahiya) was pending before the competent court, and an order directing maintenance of status quo had already been passed on 06.04.2011. The report further indicated that one of the respondents, namely Radhika Devi, was deliberately violating the said status quo order. Despite such specific findings in the police report dated 07.12.2024, the learned SDM proceeded to pass an order under Section 146(1) Cr.P.C. attaching the disputed land. 4. Learned counsel further submitted that the initial application under Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rajeev Chaddha Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Smt. Shubhavati Devi .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) Section 145 Cr.P.C. was filed by respondent No. 2, describing himself as the complainant and arraying respondent No. 3, Smt. Radhika Devi, as a respondent. Subsequently, respondent No. 2 moved an application seeking attachment of the disputed property, upon which a no objection was called from respondent No. 3, who submitted her consent. Relying upon such no objection, the learned SDM passed an order of attachment dated 22.02.2015 in Case No. 75/T-20150531023080 of 2015 (State vs. Smt. Alavati Devi and others). 5. Aggrieved by the said order dated 22.02.2015, the petitioner preferred Criminal Revision No. 250 of 2016, which was allowed by setting aside the order of attachment and remanding the matter back to the learned SDM for passing a fresh order in light of the observations made by the revisional court. The said order was passed on 10.10.2017. However, when the petitioner placed the revisional court's order dated 10.10.2017 before the learned SDM, the learned SDM orally denied having passed any order dated 22.02.2015 under Section 146(1) CrPC and instead claimed that the order had been passed on 22.12.2015. Being aggrieved by such denial, the petitioner filed an application under Section 362 Cr.P.C., which was registered as Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 91 of 2018, seeking correction of the date mentioned in the revisional order. The said application was dismissed by the revisional court, holding that there was no typographical error, as the trial court record had been summoned and perused before passing the order dated 10.10.2017. 6. Left with no alternative, the petitioner, accepting the date as 22.12.2015, preferred a second Criminal Revision No. 87 of 2024, challenging the order of attachment. In the said revision, the petitioner disclosed all relevant facts and sought setting aside of the order dated 22.12.2015. However, the said revision was dismissed on 23.06.2025, with the revisional court upholding the findings of the learned SDM without properly considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been constrained to run from pillar to post due to contradictory stands taken by the learned SDM regarding the date of the order passed under Section 146(1) Cr.P.C. It was argued that the petitioner is now left with no efficacious remedy except to challenge the entire proceedings, including the order passed under Section 146(1) Cr.P.C., before this Court. 8. Learned AGA has also conceded to the factual matrix as presented by the petitioner. A227 No. 12190 of 2025 2 9. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The petitioner has placed on record a certified copy of the order passed by the learned SDM under Section 146(1) Cr.P.C. A bare perusal of the said order clearly demonstrates that it was passed on 22.02.2015, which was also set aside in Criminal Revision No. 250 of 2016. It is indeed a travesty of justice that the learned SDM, having passed the order dated 22.02.2015, subsequently denied its existence and asserted that the order was passed on 22.12.2015. It is on account of such contradictory stand that the petitioner has been compelled to approach this Court. 10. In the given circumstances, this Court deems it appropriate to set the entire controversy at rest by examining the merits of the case. From the police report, it is evident that the petitioner and the respondents are co- sharers in the disputed property and are already engaged in a partition suit. It is well settled that proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C. are not maintainable where the parties are co-sharers in joint possession of the property. 11. Accordingly, the entire proceedings arising out of Case No. 75/T- 20150531023080 of 2015 and order dated 22.02.2015/22.12.2015 are set aside. Therefore, without entering into the merits of the other orders and judgments, particularly in view of the dispute regarding the foundational order under Section 146(1) Cr.P.C., the present petition is allowed. May 5, 2026 Ujjawal A227 No. 12190 of 2025 3 (Anil Kumar-X,J.) Digitally signed by :- UJJAWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad