Disposed¶14

Raju v. State of Up and 8 Others

Allahabad HC18 Feb 2026CRLR/1241/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Raju v. State of U.P. and 8 others, Criminal Revision No. 1241 of 2026 (Allahabad High Court, Manoj Bajaj, J., decided 28.04.2026): revision against order dated 08.12.2025 of CJM, Sant Kabir Nagar dismissing the petitioner's complaint under Section 203 Cr.P.C.; held that the Sessions Court should ordinarily be approached first and the High Court only in exceptional circumstances; petition disposed of with liberty to file revision before the Court of Session within three weeks, to be decided on merits.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the complainant-petitioner to file a revision petition before the Court of Session; if filed within three weeks, the same shall be decided on merits. ¶14

Raju vs State of Up and 8 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1241 of 2026

Raju

.....Revisionist(s)

Versus

State Of Up And 8 Others	.....Opposite
Counsel for Revisionist(s)	: Alauddin, Fakhruddin
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 85

¶7

.....Opposite Party(s)

¶8

HON'BLE MANOJ BAJAJ, J.

¶9

Petitioner- Raju has filed this revision petition to challenge the impugned order dated 08.12.2025 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sant Kabir Nagar in Misc. Application No.8040 of 2024, titled Raju vs. Dayaram and others , whereby his complaint under Section 203 Cr.P.C. has been dismissed.

¶10

None for the petitioner- complainant.

¶11

No doubt, the impugned order dated 08.12.2025 is revisable, but the statute has conferred the concurrent jurisdiction of revision with the court of sessions as well as the High Court. In the considered opinion of this Court, ordinarily a litigant must avail the remedy of revision before the court of sessions, and only under exceptional circumstances, the revisional jurisdiction of this Court can be invoked.

¶12

A perusal of the grounds pleaded in the revision petition would show that no exceptional ground is made out by the petitioner-complainant for straightway invoking the revisional jurisdiction of this Court against the impugned order dated 08.12.2025 passed by the Magistrate.

¶13

Thus, this Court is not inclined to entertain the revision petition, however, a liberty is granted to the complainant-petitioner to file the revision petition before the Court of Sessions, and if it is filed within next three weeks, the same shall be decided on merits.

¶14

The revision petition is disposed of.

¶15

April 28, 2026 Raj

¶16

(Manoj Bajaj,J.)

¶17

Digitally signed by :- RAJ KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Raju v. State of Up and 8 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju v. State of Up and 8 Others

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Murtuza Husain vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt Poonam vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Shahid Akhtar vs State of U.P. and Another

Suresh Kumar Soni and Another vs State of Up 3 Others

Ranjeet Yadav vs State of U.P.

Raghu Prasad vs State of U.P. and Another