Ram Hari and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Ram Hari and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief; the application was disposed of with the observation that the impugned order ought to be placed before the Coordinate Bench seized of Writ C No.7996 of 2025, together with conditional liberty to file a fresh application if that Bench grants such liberty.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Section 145 Cr.P.C. proceedings and the SDM's order dated 02.06.2025 (including the direction to the SHO to hand over possession of the disputed property to a receiver) are sustainable when the Coordinate Bench, in the pending Writ C No.7996 of 2025, has restrained both parties from alienating the disputed property (interim order dated 05.04.2025).

Court's answer

During the pendency of Writ C No.7996 of 2025, any orders or proceedings concerning Plot Nos. 160 and 241, if initiated and found prejudicial to the applicants, can appropriately be brought to the notice of the Coordinate Bench before which the said writ is pending; the impugned order, being a subsequent development running contrary to the interim protection granted vide order dated 05.04.2025, ought to be placed before the same Bench for consideration.

Ratio / Principle

It is clarified that if the Coordinate Bench of this Court grants such liberty, the applicants shall be free to file a fresh application to seek redressal of their grievance arising from the impugned order challenged in the present proceedings.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Saurabh Srivastava, J.), October 29, 2025 — Application u/s 528 BNSS No.24515 of 2025, Ram Hari & 3 Ors. v. State of U.P. & 3 Ors.: challenging the order dated 02.06.2025 of the SDM, Sadar, Maharajganj and the entire proceedings of Case No.67 of 2014 (State v. Chintamani and others) under Section 145 Cr.P.C., P.S. Ghughuli. Background: the applicants' bid to recall the mutation of Plot nos.160 and 241 (Mauja Goddhava, Tehsil Sadar) was declined by revenue authorities; revision before the Commissioner, Gorakhpur Division was rejected vide order dated 24.12.2024; in the pending Writ C No.7996 of 2025 a Coordinate Bench had, vide order dated 05.04.2025, restrained both parties from alienating the disputed property. Held: while the writ remains pending, subsequent orders or proceedings concerning those plots prejudicial to the applicants are to be brought to the notice of that Coordinate Bench; the impugned order, running contrary to the interim protection, ought to be placed before the same Bench. Application disposed of; if the Coordinate Bench grants liberty, the applicants may file a fresh application.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 24515 of 2025

Ram Hari And 3 Others

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others

	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Prem Chand Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 77

HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

Heard Sri Prem Chand Srivastava, learned counsel for applicants and learned AGA for the State-respondent.

The present application has been preferred assailing order dated 02.06.2025 passed by Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Maharajganj and entire proceedings of Case No.67 of 2014 (State Vs. Chintamani and others), under Section 145 Cr.P.C., P.S. Ghughuli, District Maharajganj.

It is the case of applicants that proceedings in respect of Plot nos.160 and 241 situated at Mauja Goddhava, Tappa Viraicha, Pargana Haweli, Tehsil Sadar, District Maharajganj wherein mutation has been sought to be recalled by applicants but the same was declined by concerned revenue authorities which arises cause of action in favour of applicants for preferring revision before Commissioner, Gorakhpur Division, Gorakhpur but the same was also rejected vide order dated 24.12.2024. Being aggrieved with both the orders, applicants preferred Writ C No.7996 of 2025 (Ram Hari and others Vs. State of U.P. and others) wherein Coordinate Bench of this Court while considering the prayer made through the said petition, granted interim protection in shape of restraining both the parties from alienating the property in dispute vide order dated 05.04.2025.

Learned counsel for applicants submitted that since a clear and specific direction had already been issued by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 05.04.2025, restraining both the parties from alienating the disputed property which also binds the State of U.P., the proceedings initiated under Section 145 Cr.P.C. by the concerned Sub-Divisional Officer,

NA528 No. 24515 of 2025

2

acting as an authority of the State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution, are not sustainable. Therefore, the present application has been filed to challenge the order passed by the State authority, which is also bound by the aforesaid direction issued in Writ C No.7996 of 2025. The act of directing the concerned SHO to hand over possession of the disputed property to any receiver, is contrary to the explicit directions of the Coordinate Bench of this Court.

Although, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer sought through the instant application but did not dispute that State of U.P. is one of the parties in Writ C No.7996 of 2025 wherein direction which was issued by Coordinate Bench of this Court, is applicable over all the parties.

After considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties and upon a plain reading of the entire record, it is evident that during pendency of Writ C No.7996 of 2025, any orders or proceedings concerning Plot Nos. 160 and 241, if initiated and found prejudicial to the applicants, can be appropriately brought to the notice of the Coordinate Bench before which the said writ is pending. Therefore, the impugned order, being a subsequent development affecting the applicants' interests and running contrary to the interim protection granted vide order dated 05.04.2025, ought to be placed before the same Bench for consideration.

In view of the observations as made above, the instant application is hereby disposed of .

However, it is clarified that if the Coordinate Bench of this Court grants such liberty, the applicants shall be free to file a fresh application to seek redressal of their grievance arising from the impugned order challenged in the present proceedings.

October 29, 2025 Vivek Kr.

(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)

Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad