Dismissed

Devendra Kumar Sharma v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC17 Nov 2023CRLR/5874/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a criminal revision challenging the rejection of a complaint alleging extortion. The court held the matter was a civil dispute over fee payment with no criminality involved, upholding the magistrate's order.

What did the court decide?

The criminal revision filed under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. was dismissed finding no merit as the dispute was purely civil.

Devendra Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P. and… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:219104

¶2

Court No. - 93

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 5874 of 2023

¶4

Revisionist :- Devendra Kumar Sharma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Khurshed Alam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Kurhshed Alam, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State respondents.

¶7

The instant revision under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 11.08.20023 whereby the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagina, Bijnor has rejected the complaint case of the revisionist on the ground that prima facie there is no criminality involved in the instant case.

¶8

Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that his nephew was studying in J.K. Modern Academy, Nagina Road, Dhampur and after passing the School he applied for transfer certificate and other documents on which the opposite party no.4 asked him to deposit the balance fees of 4 Sessions and also threatened his nephew due to which the revisionist had filed a complaint case, which has been rejected by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagina, Bijnor vide impugned order dated 11.08.2023.

¶9

Learned counsel for the revisionist further submits that the learned court below ought to have recorded the statements of the witnesses under Section 202 Cr.P.C., instead of the learned Magistrate has passed the impugned order relying on the police report under Section 202 (1) Cr.P.C, which specifically reveals that no parties have produced documentary evidence with regard to deposit of fees.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. states that instead of depositing the balance fees, the revisionist just to put on undue pressure on the School to avoid paying the balance fee, had filed a false and frivolous complaint case. The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagina, Bijnor, has rightly rejected the complaint case of the revisionist as there is no criminality involved in this case.

¶11

After hearing rival submissions and considering the material on record, this Court is of the view that since there is no criminality involved in this case and it is only a dispute of payment of fees, hence, the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagina, Bijnor has rightly rejected the complaint case of the revisionist vide impugned order dated 11.08.2023.

¶12

I find no merit in the instant criminal revision, it is accordingly, dismissed.

¶13

Order Date :- 17.11.2023 S.P.

¶14

Digitally signed by :- SANJAY PURI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Devendra Kumar Sharma v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devendra Kumar Sharma v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohan Lal and 2 Others vs Chandan and Another

Smt. Sushma Verma vs Sri Rajkumar and Others

Dev Narain and 2 Others vs Chhotey Lal and 13 Others

Nazrana Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arvind Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Union of India Throu General Manager Norther Railway N.Delhi vs Smt. Ramguni and Ors.