In Revision No. 189 of 2022, the Allahabad High Court dismissed the appeal against an order where the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate treated a Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. application as a complaint case without directing FIR registration. The court found no illegality in the lower court's decision.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 87
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 189 of 2022 Revisionist :- Abhishek Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Manoj Srivastava,Dheeraj Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,A.S.G.I.,Purnendu Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned AGA for the State, Mr. Purnendu Kumar Singh, learned counsel for opposite party nos.2 and 4 and perused the record.
The instant revisionist has been filed against the impugned judgement and order dated 20.12.2021 passed by learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar in Misc. Case No.743 of 2020 (Abhishek Kumar vs. Mandakini Sagar and others) by which the court below has treated the application filed by revisionist under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C as complaint case.
Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that the court below has committed manifest error of law while passing the impugned order in a cryptic manner. The learned Magistrate has misused his powers under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. while treating the application as a complaint case and refusing to direct the registration of the FIR against the accused persons, though a cognizable offence was disclosed against the opposite party nos.2 to 4 which requires the police investigation. The trial court without going to the route of the application filed under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. the learned Magistrate has passed the impugned order without applying its judicial mind, which is illegal, arbitrary and the same is liable to set aside.
On the other hand supporting the impugned order, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for opposite party nos.2 to 4 have submitted that the order passed by the learned Magistrate is inconsonance with the law, hence, there is no illegality in the said order.
I have perused the impugned order and it cannot be said that the learned Magistrate has committed any illegality by treating the application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C as complaint case. The impugned order does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity nor is there any abuse of the courts' process. Hence, no interference is called for by this Court in the present case.
The perusal of the order passed by the court below also does not reflect any such infirmity or illegality which may vindicate any interference in the same by this Court. The revision devoid of merits and the same is hereby dismissed.
The revision is, accordingly, dismissed .
Order Date :- 17.5.2022
Ajeet
Digitally signed by AJEET KUMAR PATEL Date: 2022.05.17 16:02:45 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the lower court treating a Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. application as a complaint case.
Whether the revision filed by the appellant lacks merit and merits setting aside the impugned order.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Abhishek Kumar
State Of U.P.
Mandakini Sagar
Others
Shekhar Kumar Yadav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
