MAHESH UPADHYAY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) The present quashing petition has been preferred to quash the order dtd. 9/5/2016 as passed in Criminal Revision No. 407 of 2002 by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vth, Danapur, where, revision petition filed by opposite parties against order dtd. 21/5/2002 as passed by learned S.D.M. Paliganj in Case No. 505 (M) of 1999, in a proceeding initiated under Sec. 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short Code) declaring possession of the petitioners upon the land in dispute and debarring the opposite parties from going over the said land has been allowed and order dtd. 21/5/2002 passed by learned S.D.M. Paliganj was set aside.

(3.) The brief story of prosecution is that one Ayodhya Upadhyay was the ancestor of the petitioners who had three sons namely Nandkeshwar Upadhyay, Brahmdeo Upadhyay and Narsingh Upadhyay, out of which Brahmdeo Upadhyay and Narsingh Upadhyay died issue less while Nandkeshwar Upadhyay had six sons namely Suryanath Upadhyay, Ram Ekbal Upadhyay, Ram Kripal Upadhyay, Parasnath Upadhyay, Ram Naresh Upadhyay and Dudhnath Upadhyay, out of which Suryanath Upadhyay, Ram Kripal Upadhyay, Ram Naresh Upadhyay and Dudhnath Upadhyay died issue less, while Ram Ekbal Upadhyay had three sons namely Jagdish Upadhyay, Deobansh Upadhyay, Sheobansh Upadhyay and Parasnath Upadhyay had two sons namely Ram Upadhyay and Sham Upadhyay. The petitioner are members of this genealogical table and the land in question are their khatiyani and ancestral land, while the opposite parties are neither members of this genealogical table nor in any manner concerned with disputed land in question. But the opposite parties want to grab away the ancestral property of the petitioners.