IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application No. 966 of 2009 Ranvir Singh Chauhan. …..…Applicant. Versus State of Uttarakhand and others. …….Respondents. Hon’ble Alok Singh, J. Mr. Parikshit Saini, learned counsel for the petitioner/ applicant. Mr. Nandan Arya, learned AGA for the State of Uttarakhand / respondent nos. 1 and 2. Heard learned counsels for the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that his residential house was illegally sealed by SDM, Vikas Nagar, Dehradun, by wrongly recording his consent. I am of the view that even if consent is given unless and until provision of section 146 (1) of Code of Criminal of Procedure is attracted no sealing can be ordered. Even if provision of section 146 (1) is attracted only order of attachment can be passed. Learned counsel for the petitioner confines his prayer only to the extent that Revisional Court may be directed to decide the Criminal Revision No. 166 of 2009 pending before him or in any case, his stay application may be decided positively on 21.12.2009. 2 Prayer is allowed being innocuous. Learned Revisional Court, Dehradun is directed to decide the stay application filed in criminal revision no. 166 of 2009 pending before him on 21.12.2009. With this direction, petition is disposed of. (Alok Singh, J.) 16.12.2009 SKS