Hon’ble Shamsher Bahadur Singh, J.—By means of present criminal misc. petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of impugned orders dated 29.9.2014 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 12 Bulandshahar in Criminal Revision No. 53 of 2013 (Prem Kishore v. State of U.P. and others) and 4.2.2013 passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sikandrabad, Bulandshahar in Case No. 01 of 2013 (State v. Vipul Chaudhari and another [1st party] and Raj Kishor and nine others [2nd party]) under Section 145 and 146 Cr.P.C., P.S. Sikandrabad, District Bulandshahar.

2. The factual matrix of the case is as follows :

3. Admittedly the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 purchased undivided 2/15 share from Rampal and Banarasi (sons of Vishambhar Saini) through sale-deed dated 18.8.2012 of Khata No. 1052, Gata No. 928 area 2.048 hec. and Gata No. 935(M) area 0.942 hec. (total area 2.992 hec.) situated at Sikandrabad Dehat, Pargana and Tehsil Sikandrabad, District Bulandshahar. The name of the purchasers have been mutated in revenue record vide order dated 29.9.2012 passed by Tehsildar Sikandrabad. They moved an application dated 20.11.2012 under Section 145 Cr.P.C. against Raj Kishore and nine others (co-tenure holders) before Sub Divisional Magistrate with averment that they are in peaceful possession of land so purchased but the opposite parties, who are of criminal mentality are trying to illegally evict them and also to remove curly flower crop. That there is possibility of breach of peace and inspite of undertaking and execution of personal bond in proceeding under Section 107/116 Cr.P.C., the opposite parties are not ready to maintain peace. On above application a report from concerned police station was called. The S.H.O. of P.S. concerrned submitted report dated 17.12.12 recommending the attachment of plot Nos. 928 and 935(M) for maintenance of peace. On such recommendation in response to show-cause notice, the petitioner Prem Kishore filed written objection dated 4.2.2013 with averment that the land of Khata No. 1052 is ancestral agriculture land of opposite party Nos. 1 to 10 and Rampal, Kanchid, Banarasi Das (sons of Vishambhar Saini). The land of Khata No. 1054 and 1109 was purchased by Vishambhar, Roopram, Hargovind and Prem Kishore (sons of Jwala Prasad). There was a dispute between the co-sharers and to resolve the controversy a mutual partition dated 16.11.2000 took place amongst co-sherers. The land of Khata No. 1054 and 1109 was given to Raj Kishore and Manohar (sons of Roopram), Rampal, Kanchid and Banarasi Das (sons of Vishambhar Saini) and Khata No. 1052 was given in share of opposite party Nos. 3 to 10. In view of the above, the transferor Rampal and Banarasi has no share in land of Khata No. 1052.

4. Further on the basis of aforesaid mutual partition a Partition Case No. 157 of 2009 (Prem Kishore v. Hargovind @ Govind and 18 others including Gram Sabha) was filed under Section 176 of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’) before Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sikandrabad, which is pending for decision but on the basis of allotment of shares (Quras), the preparation of preliminary decree was ordered by Sub-Divisional Magistrate on 6.8.2009 in the aforesaid case.

5. The petitioner further submits that the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 submitted an application on 15.10.2012 for impleadment as a party in aforesaid case and the same was allowed on 1.1.2013. The Sub Divisional Magistrate instead of deciding aforesaid partition case and passing final decree, erroneously and arbitrarily is trying to proceed under Section 145 Cr.P.C. The proceedings are not legally maintainable. The petitioner has also filed Original Suit No. 129 of 2013 for relief of permanent injunction and cancellation of sale-deed against respondent Nos. 4 and 5 on the ground that transferors have no right to alienate the properties of Khata No. 1052 after partition.

6. After hearing both the parties and acting on police report, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate re