Smt. Zohra Beghum and Another vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 5 Others

Court No. - 85

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 235 of 2025 Petitioner :- Smt. Zohra Beghum And Another Respondent :- State Of Uttar Pradesh And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Upendra Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Shubham Srivastava

¶3

Hon'ble Ms. Nand Prabha Shukla,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners (legal heirs), learned counsel for the respondents (legal heirs) as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶5

The present petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India has been filed seeking the following relief:-

¶6

"i) kindly set aside the impugned order dated 23.03.2016 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 16, Kanpur Nagar in Criminal Revision No. 167/2011 , Mohammad Ibrahim and others Vs. State of U.P. and others (Annexure No. 5 to the petition), and order dated 27.02.2024 passed by Additional City Magistrate (II), Kanpur Nagar in Case No. 626/2021 , Smt. Zohra Vs. Mohammad Ibrahim (Annexure No. 6 to the petition) and order dated 28.10.2024 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.20, Kanpur Nagar in Criminal Revision No. 91 of 2024 , Smt. Zohra Beghum Vs. State of U.P. and others (Annexure No.7 to the petition);"

¶7

Briefly stated, the petitioner No. 1 Smt. Zohra Beghum (now deceased) initiated the proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C., against Md. Ibrahim (now deceased) before the Additional City Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar, stating that she resided in a rented quarter at E-52, Quarter No. 58, Khapramohal, Police StationRail Bazar, Kanpur since past 50 years and regularly paid the rent to the landlord Inayat Rasool. The respondent, Md. Ibrahim (now deceased) resided in a hut in front of her quarter. At some point of time, he sought a refuge and thereafter illegally occupied a substantial portion and was not vacating, due to this reason there existed a breach of peace.

¶8

On the basis of the report forwarded by the then Station House Officer, Police Station- Rail Bazar, Kanpur Nagar, a preliminary order under Section 145 Cr.P.C., was passed on 10.05.2005 and on the basis of the evidence an order under Section 146(1) Cr.P.C., was passed on 26.05.2005 vide which the disputed property was attached and its custody was handed over to the SHO, Police Station-Rail Bazar, Kanpur Nagar.

¶9

Finally, the Additional City Magistrate (II), Kanpur Nagar, vide its order dated 02.05.2011, observed that from the statement of the landlord Inayat Rasool, it is clear that the petitioners Zohra Beghum (now deceased) and her daughter Ruksana Bano and the

¶10

A227 No. 235 of 2025

¶11

2

¶12

respondent, Md. Ibrahim (now deceased) had illegally occupied his quarter for which an injunction Suit No. 196/2006 had been instituted. The said landlord also stated that he never rented the quarter to Md. Ibrahim (now deceased) and his father Bakreedi, the respondent and Md. Ibrahim (now deceased) was the son in law of his another tenant Rafiq, who used to reside near the quarter No. 58. The landlord further admitted that Zohra Beghum (now deceased) and her daughter Ruksana Bano is still occupying her quarter as a tenant and Ibrahim and his father have illegally occupied some portion.

¶13

Considering the fact that Zohra Beghum (now deceased) and her daughter Ruksana Beghum have been occupying the quarter as a tenant since past two months, therefore, on the basis of possession, the said quarter was released in favour of Zohra Beghum (now deceased) and her daughter Ruksana Bano.

¶14

Aggrieved by the said order, the respondent Md. Ibrahim filed a criminal revision No. 167/2011 before Additional Session Judge, wherein vide order dated 29.03.2016, the Additional City Magistrate, Court No.2, Kanpur Nagar had set aside the order dated 02.05.2011 and the matter was remitted back to the Magistrate concerned to pass fresh order in accordance with law.

¶15

Accordingly, learned Additional City Magistrate, Court No. 2, Kanpur Nagar vide its order dated 27.02.2024 had set aside the orders dated 28.03.2005 and 26.05.2005 and dropped the proceedings directing the Station House Officer, PS- Rail Bazar to ensure the peace amongst the parties.

¶16

Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner, Zohra Beghum (now deceased) and her daughter Smt. Ruksana Bano preferred a Criminal Revision No. 91 of 2024 before the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 20, Kanpur Nagar wherein vide order dated 28.10.2024, their revision was dismissed and the order dated 27.02.2024 was affirmed.

¶17

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties and from perusal of the records, it transpires that the proceedings under Section 145(1) and 146(1) Cr.P.C., have already been dropped vide order dated 27.02.2024 and has been affirmed by the Revisional Court, vide order dated 28.10.2024, on the ground that a Civil Suit No. 2466 of 2016 is pending before the Civil Judge (Junior Division) Kanpur Nagar regarding the disputed property for determination of the title. Hence, there is no illegality in the order impugned and no interference is required.

¶18

Accordingly, the instant writ petition is dismissed.

¶19

Order Date :- 22.8.2025 Aditya Tripathi

¶20

Digitally signed by :- ADITYA TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Zohra Beghum and Another v. State of Uttar Pradesh and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Zohra Beghum and Another v. State of Uttar Pradesh and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Raghvendra Singh Alias Saunu and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Amarjeet and Another vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Manju Bind and Another vs the State of U.P. and 6 Others

Deepak Yadav and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Dharmveer and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt Sarita @ Doli vs State of U.P. and Another