Dismissed¶19

Parvez Siddiqui and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC3 Nov 2025CRLR/6937/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Counterfeit currency notes; organized crime; Section 111 BNS; Sections 178, 179, 180 BNS; FIR Case Crime No. 254 of 2025 dated 07.07.2025; criminal revision dismissed; revisional court order of Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court No. 2, Fatehpur upheld; remand to Magistrate for disposal in accordance with law; verification of seized notes left to trial court; recovery of Rs. 500-denomination notes from Naushad @ Chunnu, Avesh Alam and Danish; Rs. 40500/- case diary entry; State of U.P.; Allahabad High Court; Abdul Shahid, J.; decided November 3, 2025.

What did the court decide?

None; the criminal revision was dismissed as devoid of merit. ¶19

Parvez Siddiqui and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 6937 of 2025

¶3

Parvez Siddiqui And 2 Others

¶4

.....Revisionist(s)

¶5

	Versus
State of U.P. and Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Revisionist(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Ashok Kumar Rai, Pavan Kumar Pandey : G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 91

¶7

HON'BLE ABDUL SHAHID, J.

¶8

Heard Sri Mangala Prasad Rai, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Pavan Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the revisionists and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

¶9

Brief facts of the case are that the alleged incident has taken place on 07.07.2025 and the FIR was lodged on the same day at Case Crime No.254 of 2025, under Section 111 B.N.S. in respect of the offence of organized crime, under Section 178 B.N.S. pertaining to the offence of Counterfeit Government Stamps, Currency or bank notes and under Section 179 B.N.S. for the offence of using forged and counterfeit currency notes, bank notes or Government Stamps and under Section 180 B.N.S. for the offence of possession of forged Government Stamps, currency note, or bank notes.

¶10

As per the allegations, Naushad @ Chunnu, Avesh Alam, Danish and Parvez Siddiqui were named in the FIR. In para-12 of the FIR, the complainant has mentioned that the first arrested person was Naushad @ Chunnu son of Mumtaz Ahmad from whose possession a total notes of Rs. 2500/- and a mobile phone of Oppo company were recovered from his possession. All the notes were of Rs. 500/denomination which relates to Serial No. 9RK 682442, 9RK 682442, 9RK 682442, 9RK 682442, 9RK 682441. The second arrested person was Avesh Alam son of Rasool aged about 24 years from whose possession, currency notes of Rs. 1500/- and mobile of Oppo company were recovered. All the notes were of Rs. 500/denomination which relates to Serial No. 9RK 682442, 9RK 682442 and 9RK 689737. The third arrested person was Danish son of Shahid, aged about 28 years from whose possession Rs.2000/- and one mobile of Narzo company were recovered. All the notes were of Rs.500/- denomination which relates to Serial Nos.9RK 682442, 9RK 682442 and 9RK 689763. When they were asked about the recovered notes that what were they doing with these notes, they accepted that these notes were supplied to them for circulation in the market by the accused persons who were not arrested in the alleged incident.

¶11

CRLR No. 6937 of 2025

¶12

¶13

Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the revisionists further submitted that there are no specific allegations against the revisionists who have been arrested on the spot. There is no illegality in the order passed by the Magistrate dated 10.07.2025 whereas the impugned order dated 10.9.2025 is having all the illegalities as all the correct facts of the case have not been taken into consideration by the revisional court while passing the impugned order, therefore, it is liable to be set aside.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. has submitted that the impugned order has been passed in correct perspective and is in accordance with law.

¶15

The order impugned has been passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court No. 2, District Fatehpur in Criminal Revision No. 125 of 2025, State through DGC ( Crl.) Fatehpur Vs. Parvez Siddiqui and others. Learned revisional court has passed a detailed order after perusing the material available on record.

¶16

The currency notes of Rs. 2500/- was recovered from Naushad, Rs.1500/- was recovered from Avesh Alam and Rs. 2000/- was recovered from Danish. It has been submitted that all these notes were given to them by Parvez Siddiqui and previously, they had also circulated these notes in the market. In the case diary dated 20.06.2025, it has also been mentioned that one Avesh Alam came with notes to the tune of Rs.40500/- which is stated to be deposited in the bank account of Parvez Siddiqui. The notes being lighter in weight and thereafter on the information, the accused Parvez was arrested.

¶17

At this stage, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the revisionists submits that the recovered notes have not been verified and intensified that requires which can be seen by the trial court. No fact can be decided by this Court in this jurisdiction. Learned trial court has remanded the matter to the learned Magistrate concerned for disposal the case in accordance with law.

¶18

I find no illegality in the impugned order dated 10.09.2025 passed by the trial court. The revision being devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed.

¶19

It is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶20

November 3, 2025 Gss

¶21

(Abdul Shahid,J.)

¶22

Digitally signed by :- GIRAJA SHANKER SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Parvez Siddiqui and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parvez Siddiqui and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manoj Kumar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Naushad Khan vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rukmeena Saroj Alias Rukmani Devi vs State of U.P. and Another

Anand and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Shishupal vs State of U.P. through Principal Secretary Home Government of U.P. at Lucknow and Another

Tej Singh and Another vs State of U.P. and Another