- (1.) Heard Sri Jai Shankar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri A.B. Maurya for O.P. no.2 and the learned A.G.A.
(2.) This application u/s 482 CrPC is preferred for quashing the order dated 16.10.2015 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Court no.5, Bareilly in Criminal Revision no. 10 of 2015, whereby the revision was allowed and the order dated 31.12.2014 passed under Section 146(1) CrPC was set aside.
(3.) The applicant claims to have purchased a property at Mohalla Siklapur, Bareilly (Arazi no. 248) under a registered sale deed dated 28.10.1988 and after obtaining requisite sanction from the Bareilly Development Authority on 28.4.1988 proceeded to raise constructions. The applicant filed an application under Section 145 CrPC before the Addl. City Magistrate-I, Bareilly on 15.12.2011 alleging that O.P. no.2 is attempting to forcibly dispossess the applicant from a part of the property, i.e. a garage. A police report dated 13.5.2012 was submitted to the effect that wife of O.P. no.2 has a will in her favour of the property in dispute from one Brij Nandan Tripathi, but the frontal portion is occupied by the applicant. The report was objected by the applicant alleging that the applicant is the sole owner of the property in dispute under the registered sale deed and O.P. no.2 has no concern, whatsoever and the alleged will is forged and fabricated. The Addl. City Magistrate-I, Bareilly passed a preliminary order under Section 145(1) CrPC, calling upon O.P. no.2 to submit his reply. The applicant submitted an application dated 28.12.2012 to the S.S.P, Bareilly alleging that O.P. no.2, i.e. his real brother on 27.12.2012 at about 7:00 P.M. forcibly broke open the garage- room and took forcibly possession thereof, an attempt was made to lodge an FIR, but of no consequence. It was thus prayed that locks installed by O.P. no.2 be got broken and possession be delivered to the applicant. A police report dated 13.3.2013 recommended action u/s 146(1). The O.P. no.2 also filed O.S. No. 26 of 2013 before the Civil Court on 30.5.2013 claiming permanent prohibitory injunction as against the applicant. The Addl. City Magistrate-I, Bareilly, proceeded to pass an order of attachment of the property in dispute under Section 146(1) CrPC on 31.12.2014 and the possession thereof be handed over in supurdagi. The O.P. no.2 challenged the order dated 31.12.2014 in Criminal Revision no. 10 of 2015, which came to be allowed on 16.10.2015, setting aside the order dated 31.12.2014, which is impugned herein.;