JUDGMENT :

1. The present criminal revision under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C has been preferred against the order dated 07.05.2019 passed by the Special Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (CBI) (AP), Lucknow in criminal Case No. 2229 of 2006 State Vs. Kawar Mahmood Lari and others rejecting the application of the revisionist under Section 239 Cr.P.C for their discharge from the above mentioned criminal case.

2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the revisionist that the said Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate has utterly failed to apply its judicial mind in the matter and passed the impugned order in a very cursory manner. Apprising the fact, learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that the aforesaid FIR was lodged to the effect that the ascendants of late Mumtaz Ahmad Lari the father of first informant was carrying out plotting of plot No. 224 and 225 area 28206 sq. ft situated in village Iradatganj Sitapur Road Lucknow and transferred the same to different persons by different sale deeds including the revisionist who are shown as accused along with vendor thereof in the FIR. The first informant Musheer Ahmad Lari along with four other descendants of late Mumtaz Ahmad Lari filed civil suit for declaration against the vendors as well as the vendees in the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Malihabad, Lucknow which was contested by defendants. Preliminary issue was raised by the present revisionist under Order VII Rule 11 Civil Procedure Code (for short C.P.C.). The suit of the plaintiff was dismissed under Order VII Rule 11 C.P.C. Being aggrieved with the order of learnd Civil Judge (Senior Division) the informant preferred First Appeal bearing No. 55 of 2008 (Musheer Ahmad Lari and others Vs. Khawar Mahmood Lari and other)before this Court which is still pending consideration. Complainant lodged FIR against revisionist concurrent to civil proceedings.

3. After conducting investigation, charge-sheet has been filed against some of the accused in the Case Crime No. 2229 of 2006 under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC. The court took cognizance and summoned the accused persons. The above noted charge-sheet dated 20.09.2006 was filed against eight persons including the revisionist and other co-accused including Mohd. Khalid Khan s/o Nawab Ali Khan and Mohd. Tariq Khan s/o Salim Khan.

4. The revisionist filed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C before the Lucknow Bench of High Court of Judicature at Allahabad which came to be registered as Misc. Case No. 523 of 2007. Co-accused Mohd. Khalid and Mohd. Tariq also preferred application under Section 482 Cr.P.C which were registered as Criminal Misc. Case No. 462 of 2007 and 390 of 2007 respectively. The petitions filed by Mohd. Khalid and Mohd. Tariq under Section 482 Cr.P.C were dismissed by common order dated 25.07.2007. However the application preferred by the present revisionist remained pending in Court and the proceeding of the aforesaid case was stayed.

5. Aggrieved with the order of the High Court dated 25.07.2007, Mohd. Khalid and Mohd. Tariq preferred in Special Leave to Appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court being Criminal Appeal No. 2652 of 2009 (Mohd. Khalid Vs. State of U.P) and Criminal Appeal No. 2543 of 2009 (Mohd. Tariq Khan Vs. State of U.P.).

6. Supreme Court after duly considering the factum of the pendency of civil suit for declaration of title in the disputed land and the first appeal arising out therefrom is pending in the High Court conluded that in view of the aforesaid facts no case has been made out against the appellant for initiating criminal proceedings. Consequently both the appeals were allowed vide order dated 06.08.2015 and the order passed by the High Court was set aside.

7. So far as the present appellants are concerned, charge-sheet is filed against them in Case Crime No. 332 of 2005 dated 31.10.2005 at Police Station Wazeerganj District Lucknow.

8. It is further submitted that the case of present revisionist is identical to the c