Hon’ble Shri Kant Tripathi, J.—Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the respondent and perused the record.

2. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the petition is finally disposed of.

3. This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short ‘Code’) has been filed against the order dated 4.6.2010 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Mau in Case No. 504 of 2005, (Ramakant Pandey v. Surya Nath Singh and others) whereby the applicants have been summoned as accused.

4. It appears that the Additional Commissioner, Azamgarh Division Azamgarh while disposing of Revision No. 870/120M (Ram Badan v. Surya Nath Singh) under Section 219 of the Uttar Pradesh Land Revenue Act, found that the revenue record entry in favour of the applicant No. 1 in respect of Plot Nos. 1297 and 1333 of village Tajopur, Pargana and Tehsil Sadar, District Mau was a forged entry and accordingly allowed the revision and directed that the aforesaid plots be recorded as Banzar in the revenue record. Against the order of the Additional Commissioner, the petitioner No. 1 filed Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 51950 of 2003 in this Court, which was finall