Hon'ble Sudhir Kumar Saxena, J.

1. This revision has been filed under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. against the order dated 18/12/2014 passed by City Magistrate, Gorakhpur in case no. 24 under Section 133 Cr.P.C., directing revisionist to remove the encroachment within a week, failing which face prosecution under Section 188 IPC.

2. I have heard Sri P.K. Srivastava for respondent and learned AGA. None appeared for the revisionist. I have perused the record.

3. Briefly stated revisionist's case is that an application was filed by Smt. Manorama Srivastava before City Magistrate, whereupon Police submitted report to the effect that revisionist-Smt.Ramawati has closed the public way creating obstruction in movement of the common people. Agreeing with the report of the Police, City Magistrate issued a conditional order on 25/07/2013 under Section 133 (1) Cr.P.C. Smt. Ramawati in her statement before learned Magistrate alleged that she had been living with her husband and children in House no. 311, since long as tenant, which house has been purchased by her. No encroachment has been done by her. After demolishing old house, new construction has been made and report of the Police is