VIPIN SINHA, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri. N. S. Chahar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri. M. P. S. Chauhan, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and learned AGA appearing for the State.
(2.) THE instant application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the attachment order passed by O.P. No.3 i.e. S.H.O. Gonda in respect of a land bearing Khata No. 464, Gata No. 1230, Rakba 0.227 Hect, Gata No. 1433, Rakba -0.18 hect. Gata No. 1434, Rakba 0.305 hect. situated at village Nagla Sartaj -Payadpur, Pargana -Hasangarh, Tehsil -Iglas, District Aligarh initiated on 31.10.2014 U/s 151/107/116 Cr.P.C.
(3.) SRI . N. S. Chahar, learned counsel for the applicant has vehemently pressed his application on the ground that the order of attachment in the present case has been passed by Sub -Inspector, who had no authority to pass the order of attachment. Brief facts of the case, as referred to, by learned counsel for the applicant are to the effect that the applicant and one Mahaviri had purchased a piece of land of Khata No. 464, Gata No. 1230, Rakba 0.227 hect., Gata No. 1433, Rakba -0.18 hect. Gata No. 1434, Rakba 0.305 hect. Total area situated at village Nagla Sartaj -Payadpur, Pargana -Hasangarh, Tehsil -Iglas, District Aligarh through a registered sale deed dated 19.3.2014 for total sale consideration of Rs.12 Lakhs and pursuant to the said sale deed, the names of the applicant and Mahaviri were mutated in the revenue records vide order dated 28.4.2014. Further, when O.P. No.2 and his associates started interfering with the peaceful possession of the applicant, the applicant has filed a civil suit bearing civil suit no. 709 of 2014 (Smt. Lalita Devi and another v. Soran Singh and others) before the court of Civil Judge (S.D.), Aligarh. As the O.P. No.2 was interfering with the possession, an application was filed on 25.8.2014 by the applicant before A.D.M., Aligarh regarding the illegal interference in the peaceful possession by opposite party and also sought compliance of order dated 12.8.2014, which was passed in civil suit no. 709 of 2014. However, in spite of several applications filed by the applicant, the SHO colluded with the O.P. No.2 and in pursuance of such collusion had illegally passed an order of attachment of crops and had also submitted a challani report under Sections 107/116 Cr.P.C.;