Disposed¶15

Rajesh Gupta v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC11 Feb 2026CRLR/1269/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court; Criminal Revision No. 1269 of 2026 (CRLR No. 1269 of 2026); Rajesh Gupta v. State of U.P. and Another; Manoj Bajaj, J.; decided April 7, 2026; dismissal of discharge application under Section 245(2) Cr.P.C. by ACJM Farrukhabad; complaint under Sections 420, 423, 427, 467, 468 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Fatehgarh (Complaint Case No. 17452 of 2024); concurrent revisional jurisdiction of Sessions Court and High Court; liberty to approach Sessions Court within three weeks; land sale dispute of 2004 (25 sq. yard sold against agreed 40 sq. yard); disposed without merits.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to file the revision petition before the Court of Sessions within three weeks; if so filed, it shall be decided on merits. Revision petition otherwise disposed of without being entertained on merits. ¶15

Rajesh Gupta vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2026)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1269 of 2026

¶2

Rajesh Gupta

¶3

.....Revisionist(s)

¶4

	Versus
State of U.P. and Another		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Revisionist(s)	:	Dharmendra Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	:	G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 85

¶6

HON'BLE MANOJ BAJAJ, J.

¶7

Petitioner has filed this revision petition to challenge the impugned order dated 17.10.2025 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Farrukhabad in Complaint Case No. 17452 of 2024, titled Ramveer Vs. Rajesh Kumar and another, under Section 420, 423, 427, 467, 468 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Fatehgarh, District Farrukhabad, whereby his application under Section 245(2) Cr.P.C. has been dismissed.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the complainant was sold land measuring 25 square yard in the year 2004, who has alleged cheating on the ground that against the agreed area of 40 square yard lesser area was sold to him thereby causing wrongful loss and his application seeking discharge has been dismissed by the Magistrate vide order dated 17.10.2025.

¶9

During the course of hearing, it is also stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that a civil suit was also filed by complainant in respect of the sale deed executed by petitioner, however, neither the copies are on record nor he is aware of the status of the suit.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner further states that after filing of the complaint in the year 2009, the land in question was further sold by the complainant in 2015, however, that sale deed is also not on record.

¶11

No doubt, the impugned order dated 13.11.2025 is revisable, and the said jurisdiction is concurrent i.e. before the Sessions Court as well as this Court, but this Court in the absence of any exceptional ground for

¶12

CRLR No. 1269 of 2026

¶13

¶14

availing the remedy before High Court is not inclined to entertain the revision petition. However, a liberty is granted to the 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.

¶15

In view of the above, the revision petition is disposed of.

¶16

(Manoj Bajaj,J.)

¶17

April 7, 2026 P.S.Parihar

¶18

Digitally signed by :- POORAN SINGH PARIHAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rajesh Gupta v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Gupta 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

Ashok Kumar and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Upendra Pratap Singh vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Vinesh Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

Imran Shah vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinod vs State of U.P. and 12 Others

Narendra Kumar vs State of U.P. and 4 Others