JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. This criminal revision has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 22.4.2011 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.3, Hardoi in Criminal Appeal No.42 of 2010 and the judgment and order dated 3.3.2010 passed by the S.D.M., Bilgram, Hardoi in Case No.39/4104 of 2002, Case Crime No.263/2002 thereby convicting the sentencing the revisionist under Section 198-A(2) of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act for three months imprisonment and fine of Rs.1,500/-.

3. Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that the finding recorded by learned trial Court regarding the conviction of revisionist, under Section 198A(2) U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act is against the weight of evidence, which is illegal and not sustainable in the eye of law because there was a civil dispute pending between the parties. Therefore, the impugned order of conviction is liable to be set aside.

4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has submitted that the finding of conviction by learned trial Court has been recorded on the basis of proper analysis and appreciation of evidence. Therefore, the same cannot be termed illegal or perverse and