IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE ON THE 19^th OF NOVEMBER, 2025 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 12851 of 2024 GAURISHANKAR AND OTHERS Versus KAILASH KUMAR SHARMA Appearance:

Shri Siddharth Sharma - Advocate for the petitioners.

Shri Vilas Tikhe - Advocate for the respondent.

ORDER The present petition under Section 482 of the CrPC has been filed by the petitioners No.1 and 2, namely, Gaurishankar and Devendra @

Deepak Sharma seeking following reliefs:

"Hence it is most humbly prayed that the present petition may be allowed and proceeding initiated under Section 145 and 146 of Cr.P.C. Case No. 004/2022X145 pending before S.D.M. Gohad District Bhind M.P. may kindly be setaside/quashed, in the interest of justice."

Short facts of the case are that the respondent/Kailash Kumar Sharma had instituted a complaint before the learned SDM, Gohad, District Bhind under Sections 145 and 146 of the Code of Criminal Procedure alleging that a dispute had arisen between him and the petitioners regarding certain agricultural lands situated at Village Khaneta, District Gohad, Village Chak Khaneta, District Gohad and Village Chimka, District Gohad. In the said complaint, respondent No.1 claimed ownership over one-half share of the land and further alleged that he had been in continuous cultivation of his purported share. He also alleged that the petitioners were interfering in his possession and were attempting to remove the standing crops, asserting that he had inherited one-fourth share from his father, late Ramgopal, and another one-fourth share from his uncle, late Ramswaroop. On the basis of these allegations, the learned SDM, Gohad, passed an interim order dated 17.03.2022 under Section 146(1) Cr.P.C., directing attachment of the land and handing over possession thereof, including the standing crops, to the Village Kotwar with police assistance. Supurdginama and Panchnama were directed to be prepared by the concerned police station and to be placed before the SDM. Aggrieved by the said attachment order, the petitioners preferred Criminal Revision Nos.9/2022 and 10/2022 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gohad. Both revision petitions were dismissed vide order dated 07.04.2022, thereby affirming the interim attachment order passed by the SDM. Before the Revisional Court, the petitioners categorically denied the allegations of respondent and clarified that respondent had no lawful claim over the one-fourth share of late Ramswaroop, as the said Ramswaroop had executed his last Will dated 30.07.2018 in favour of respondent No.2/Devendra. It was also brought to the notice of the Revisional Court that petitioner No.1 had already been declared the owner of one-half portion of the land belonging to one Shivcharan pursuant to the judgment and decree dated 15.12.2012 passed in Civil Suit No.78-A/2012 on the basis of a compromise. Respondent/Kailash Kumar Sharma and late Ramswaroop were defendants in the said civil suit. Consequently, petitioner No.1 owns one-half portion of the land, petitioner No.2 owns one-fourth portion and only one-fourth portion belongs to respondent/Kailash Kumar Sharma through inheritance from his father (Ramgopal Sharma). It is also pertinent that prior to receipt of any notice from the SDM in respect of the Section 145 proceedings, petitioner No.1 had already instituted Civil Suit No. RCSA/52/2023 before the learned Civil Judge Class-II, Gohad, seeking permanent injunction against respondent No.1 and the SDM regarding his share of the property, and the said civil suit remains pending adjudication. Likewise, petitioner No.2 has instituted Civil Suit No. RCSA/59/2022 before the learned Civil Judge Class-II, Gohad, seeking declaration and permanent injunction over the one- fourth share earlier belonging to late Ramswaroop, which matter is also sub-judice. Respondent No.1 himself has instituted a separate civil suit concerning the same subject-matter. Thus, multiple ci