HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 23055 of 2026 Court No. - 73 HON'BLE SANDEEP JAIN, J. The instant writ petition has been filed seeking the following relief: "i. Issue a writ, order, rule or direction in the nature of writ of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent authorities to ensure compliance of judgment and order dated 07.07.2025 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Baberu, District Banda in Case No.4149/2023, Computerized Case No.T202307110204149, Siyaram vs. Santosh and others, and put the petitioner in possession over the arazi in question(112 feet x 80 feet) in pursuance of agreement dated 05.06.1995. ii. Issue any other writ, order, rule or direction of the suitable nature which the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case." Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a dispute arose between the petitioner and private respondents nos. 4 and 5 in respect of the disputed property, wherein proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C. were initiated and the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Baberu, District Banda, by order dated 7.07.2025, recorded a finding that the petitioner was in peaceful possession over the disputed property and restrained the private respondents from interfering with his peaceful possession. A copy of the said order was also directed to be forwarded to the Station House Officer, Police Station Baberu, District Banda, for compliance. It is submitted that despite the aforesaid order, the private respondents continued to interfere with the peaceful possession of the petitioner, compelling him to approach the District Magistrate, Banda, who, in turn, Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Raj Karan Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : Siyaram .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) directed the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Baberu, to ensure compliance with the order dated 7.07.2025. However, the said order has not been effectively implemented. It is further submitted that the private respondents had also moved an application for recall/restoration of the order dated 7.07.2025, which came to be dismissed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Baberu, by order dated 7.08.2026. Thus, according to learned counsel for the petitioner, the order dated 7.07.2025 has attained finality and there remains no impediment in its enforcement. Per contra, learned AGA, on the basis of instructions, submits that a perusal of the order dated 7.07.2025 itself makes it evident that the petitioner continues to be in possession of the disputed property and that he has not been dispossessed by the private respondents. Therefore, no further direction is warranted in the present proceedings. He further submits that, in the event the petitioner is dispossessed from the disputed property, it would be open to him to avail the appropriate remedy before the concerned police or revenue authorities in accordance with law. It is, thus, submitted that the present writ petition has been filed without there being any subsisting cause of action warranting interference by this Court. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. From a perusal of the record, it is evident that a dispute had arisen between the petitioner and the private respondents in respect of the disputed property, pursuant to which proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C. were initiated before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Baberu, District Banda. By order dated 7.07.2025, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate recorded a categorical finding that the petitioner was in peaceful possession of the disputed property and restrained the private respondents from interfering with such possession. The said order was also directed to be communicated to the Station House Officer, Police Station Baberu, District Banda, for compliance within seven days. It further transpires that the petitioner submitted an application dated 01.09.2025 before the District Magistrate, Banda, seeking enforcement of the order dated 7.07.2025, whereupon the Sub-Divisional Magistrate was directed to take steps for enforcement of the said order, subject to there CRLP No. 23055 of 2026 2 being no challenge to the same by way of appeal or other appropriate proceedings. It is also apparent from the record that, in the meantime, the private respondents preferred an application for recall/restoration of the order dated 7.07.2025, principally on the ground that the said order had been passed ex parte without affording them an opportunity of hearing. The said application has been dismissed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Baberu, by order dated 7.08.2026. However, the order dated 7.08.2026 is amenable to the remedy of criminal revision before the competent Sessions Court and, as stated, the period prescribed for availing such remedy is ninety days. Thus, at this stage, the proceedings arising out of the order dated 7.08.2026 cannot be treated as having attained finality. Consequently, it would be premature for this Court to issue any positive direction for enforcement of the order dated 7.07.2025 in the manner sought by the petitioner. Furthermore, the material available on record does not indicate that the petitioner has, in fact, been dispossessed from the disputed property. On the contrary, the order dated 7.07.2025 itself records the possession of the petitioner, and there is no material before us to establish any subsequent dispossession or an imminent threat thereof requiring intervention of this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction. In view of the foregoing, no ground for interference is made out. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed as being devoid of merit. It is, however, open to the petitioner to avail such remedy as may be available to him in law, in the event of any subsequent dispossession or interference with his possession. September 23, 2026 Himanshu CRLP No. 23055 of 2026 3 (Sandeep Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- HIMANSHU YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad