JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Anil Bhushan, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri Siddharth kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Suresh Bahadur Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party No.1. Even in the revised list none appeared on behalf of the opposite party nos.2 to 4 nor any counter affidavit has been filed on their behalf, this court proceed to hear the matter finally.

2. This revision is directed against the order dated 26.07.2001 passed by learned District and Sessions Judge, Kannauj by which he has accepted the final report submitted by the Investigating Officer and set aside the order dated 25.04.2001 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Chhibramau by which he has summoned the opposite party no.2 under Section 379 I.P.C.

3. The brief facts of the present case is that the revisionist has constructed a house in the property in dispute and also there are 32 trees of Mango and one tree of Neem. On 06.09.2000 respondent No.2 along with some unsocial elements has broken the lock of the house of the revisionist and took possession on the same and also take away the goods of Rs. 8000/-. The revisionist tried to lodge F.I.R. by approaching the concerned Police