Petitioner sought writ relief under Article 227 challenging dismissal of his application for FIR registration under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. alleging fraudulent sale deed. High Court dismissed petition, finding lower courts applied judicial mind adequately.
Petition dismissed for lack of merit without interference in lower court orders.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:191447
Court No. - 81
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6812 of 2023 Petitioner :- Akash Varma Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bilal Hasan Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma,J.
judgment in Mohd. Ibrahim and others vs. State of Bihar and others (2009) 8 SCC 751 .
"......The Magistrate/court concerned cannot be expected to act upon an application in a mechanical manner. He shall be failing in his duty in case he fails to apply his mind. Settled position of law is that the Magistrate shall order for registration of a case if application 'discloses' commission of cognizable offence. In my view, the disclosure of cognizable offence cannot be construed to mean replication of words or the facts in such a manner as may fit within four corners of an offence defined in statutes. This is a common knowledge that applications under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. may be drafted cleverly and may be dotted with sham assertions or half truths with legal advice, so as to persuade the courts to spring into action. If such a narrow and short sighted interpretation is done, it will be like playing in the hands of unscrupulous litigant. While passing an order on application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. the court is expected to apply its judicial mind. He is expected to be judicious, discreet and cautious and not to be swayed by mere use of certain words and legal terminology. He can certainly look for substance in the allegations and existence of life in the assertions.
8. It may usefully be noted that that despite dismissal of the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. the revisionist/complainant still has certain remedies open in law."
Order Date :- 5.10.2023
#Vikram/-
Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should exercise powers under Article 227 to interfere with orders declining registration of an FIR under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. in a civil nature dispute.
Whether the impugned orders passed by courts below were devoid of merits or applied judicial mind while dismissing the application.
Whether the petitioner has pointed out any violation of law or factual grounds justifying writ jurisdiction under Article 227.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
M/s. Indian Oil Corporation vs. M/s. NEPC India Limited and OthersReferred¶10
M/s. Indian Oil Corporation vs. M/s. NEPC India Limited and Others, 2006 (6) SCC 736 · Who else cites this
Mohd. Ibrahim and others vs. State of Bihar and othersReferred¶11
Mohd. Ibrahim and others vs. State of Bihar and others (2009) 8 SCC 751 · Who else cites this
Rameshwari vs. State of U.P. And 5 OthersReferred¶12
Criminal Revision No. 375 of 2023 (Rameshwari vs. State of U.P. And 5 Others) decided on 8.5.2023
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Akash Varma
State Of U.P.
Jyotsna Sharma
Vikram Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
