JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. Santosh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the revisionist, Mr. Sheetal Prasad Chakarvorty and Mr. P.K. Shahi, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.

2. This criminal revision under section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the revisionist against the impugned order dated 20.12.2019 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Auraiya in Complaint Case No. 4329 of 2019, arising out of Misc. Case No. 268 of 2019 (Anand Kumar Pandey vs. Rani Devi and others), whereby the application moved under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. was treated as complaint and proceeded to record the statement under Section 200 Cr.P.C.

3. The brief allegations as alleged in the present case are that the complainant/revisionist filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. on 11.06.2019 before the learned Magistrate stating therein that the complainant had purchased land no.127/1 situated at Mauja Manepur, Phaphund, District-Auraiya from the opposite party no.3 and, thereafter, his name entered in the revenue record and he was absolute owner of the said land. Some trees were standing over the said land, but the accused opposite party no.2 to 4 obtained permission from