P.N. Goel, J. - (1.) This revision has been filed against the order dated 20 -1 -1981 passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge Rampur, in Criminal Revision No, 97 of 1980 arising out of a proceeding under Sec. 145 Code of Criminal Procedure:
(2.) Facts giving rise to this revision are these ; One Badan Singh was tenure holder of Chak No. 11 measuring 3.34 acres in village Bichpura, Lalji Tehsil Shahabad, district Rampur. He agreed to sell his land to Himanchal Singh, Yad Ram Singh and Badri Singh revisionists. It is said that he executed a sale deed in bis favour on 14 -7 -1978 but he did not get the sale deed registered. On 18 -7 -1978 Badan Singh executed another sale deed of the same land in favour of Ram Autar Singh, opposite party, and got the sale deed registered on the same day. On 18 -8 -1978 i. e. one month after the execution of the sale deed in favour of Ram Autar Singh, Himanchal Singh and others presented the sale deed said to have been executed on 14 -7 -1978 before the Sub Registrar and desired its compulsory registration. Their sale deed was registered on 31 -8 -1978. Mutation proceedings started between the parties before the Tehsildar Shahabad. By order dated 31 -3 -1980 the Tehsildar passed order of mutation in favour of Ram Autar Singh. Himanchal Singh and others preferred an appeal against the order of the Tehsildar, before the S. D. M. Shahabad. Their appeal was dismissed.
(3.) Proceedings under Sec. 145 Code of Criminal Procedure started between the parties before the S. D. M. The Magistrate could not come to the conclusion as to which party was in actual physical possession of the land and, therefore, he passed order that the land would remain under attachment till the matter was decided by a competent Court (vide order dated 6 -9 -1979). On the basis of the mutation order Ram Autar Singh moved the Magistrate to release the land in his favour. Himanchal Singh and others filed a revision before Additional Commissioner. Rohilkhand against the appellate order of S. D. M. in the mutation case and the Additional Commissioner passed a stay order. It means that the Additional Commissioner directed that the mutation be not carried out. But prior to the stay order the name of Ram Autar Singh was mutated in the Khatauni. Id view of the stay order, the S. D. M. refused to release the land under Sec. 145 Code of Criminal Procedure in favour of Ram Autar Singh (vide order dated 9 -7 -1980). Against this order Ram Autar Singh filed criminal revision No. 97 of 1980 before the Sessions Judge, Rampur. The revision was heard and allowed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Rampur on 20 -1 -1979. The Additional Sessions Judge held that notwithstanding the stay order passed by the Additional Commissioner the Magistrate should have released the land in favour of Ram Autar Singh because mutation order stood in his favour. The Additional Sessions Judge took support for his view from the cases of Vinai Kumar v/s. Om Prakash,, 1980 AGrR 4 and Maqsood Ali Khan v/s. Ahmad Saeed Khan,, 1957 AWR 113. It is against this order of the 1st Additional Sessions Judge that Himan ­chal Singh and others have preferred this revision.;