CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 7847 of 2025 Sanjay Vishwakarma State of U.P & Anr. v. Revisionist(s)

by Sri Trivikram Singh, Advocate on behalf of Karan Singh (applicant- intervenor) are taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the Revisionist; learned AGA for State and learned counsel for intervenor.

This criminal revision has been filed against the order dated 01.09.2025, passed by Additional Magistrate II, Azamgarh in Computerized Case No.D202315060001407, (Ramawati Devi and others versus Sanjay Vishwakarma and others), under Section 133 Cr.P.C. whereby the learned Magistrate has confirmed the previous order dated 16.02.2023 and directed the second party (Revisionist herein) to remove the obstruction from the disputed land otherwise the same will be removed by using force.

Learned AGA has submitted that he has received instructions, whereby it has been informed that in compliance of order dated 01.09.2025, the encroachment from way leading to the Harijan Basti has been removed.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the Revisionist's that the disputed land is the part of Revisionist; agricultural land which does not fall in the ambit of public place. No revenue papers are available to disclose that the disputed land is the public place.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of intervenor submitted that the disputed land is single way/path for Harijan Basti which is being used for last several decades and the area of land to which the Revisionist is the 2 CRLR No. 7847 of 2025 owner is not getting effected by this land being used as path.

As per impugned order, the disputed land is about 8ft. wide and 25 ft. long passage which is about thirty years old and situated between the plot No.51- M. measuring about 0.278 hectare to plot No.53-M. measuring about 0.490 hectare.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of intervenor is not able to show any revenue record in which the disputed land is endorsed as a public passage of the Harijan Basti, since the ownership of the land is challenged, so the real facts are required to be placed before this Court, therefore, learned AGA is directed to seek further instructions regarding the nature of land as well as disputes pending or disposed of regarding the ownership/possession of the disputed land within a period of three weeks.

Since the impugned order has been executed, therefore, there is no need to pass any order to stay the effect and implementation of the impugned order.

List in the daily cause list, after three weeks, in the top ten cases. January 30, 2026 I.A.Siddiqui (Divesh Chandra Samant,J.)