Dismissed¶17

Seema Gupta v. State of U.P. and 9 Others

Allahabad HC15 Mar 2026CRLR/4426/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court, Abdul Shahid, J., Criminal Revision No. 4426 of 2025, Seema Gupta v. State of U.P. and 9 Others, decided March 16, 2026 — criminal revision against CJM, Azamgarh order dated 24.06.2025 rejecting Section 173(4) Cr.P.C. application dismissed; incident of 22.02.2025, PS Bardah, Azamgarh; cross FIRs Case Crime Nos. 49 and 50 of 2025 between pattidar family members over ancestral property; liberty reserved to seek proceedings against further accused before trial court.

What did the court decide?

There is neither any illegality nor irregularity in the impugned order rejecting the revisionist's application under Section 173(4) Cr.P.C.; the criminal revision lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed. ¶17

Seema Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 9 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4426 of 2025

¶3

Seema Gupta

¶4

.....Revisionist(s)

¶5

	Versus
State Of U.P. And 9 Others		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Revisionist(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: P.K. Singh, Shashi Ka : Dhananjay Kumar Mashhood Abbas	nt Singh Pandey, G.A.,

¶6

Court No. - 87

¶7

HON'BLE ABDUL SHAHID, J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel appearing for opposite party nos. 2 to 10, and the learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶9

The instant criminal revision has been preferred against the impugned order dated 24.06.2025 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Azamgarh, in Application No. 932 of 2025 (Seema Gupta vs. Guddu), under Section 173(4) Cr.P.C., Police Station Bardah, District Azamgarh, whereby the said application was rejected.

¶10

Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that the revisionist had filed an application under Section 173(4) Cr.P.C., which has been rejected by the learned trial court vide the impugned order dated 24.06.2025. He has further submitted that the incident occurred on 22.02.2025 and the injured sustained several injuries. It is also submitted that opposite party nos. 8, 9, and 10 are government officials, namely the S.H.O., Sub-Inspector, and Constable, respectively, of Police Station Bardah, District Azamgarh.

¶11

Learned counsel for the opposite parties have opposed the revision and submitted that the learned trial court has rightly rejected the application under Section 173(4) Cr.P.C. filed by the revisionist.

¶12

A perusal of the record shows that the learned trial court has observed that the revisionist had obtained the report from the concerned police

¶13

CRLR No. 4426 of 2025

¶14

¶15

station. It has been reported that both parties are pattidars and belong to the same family lineage, and there is a dispute between them regarding possession of ancestral property. The incident occurred on 22.02.2025. Harikesh, the complainant in the case, filed an application on the basis of which a case was registered vide Case Crime No. 49 of 2025 at the concerned police station. On the application of Ashwini, the brother of the complainant, another case, vide Case Crime No. 50 of 2025, was also registered at the same police station.

¶16

It is conceded by the learned counsel for the revisionist that an FIR has already been registered regarding the said incident against the accused persons vide Case Crime No. 49 of 2025. An FIR in respect of the same incident has also been lodged by the brother of the complainant vide Case Crime No. 50 of 2025. If any further accused are found to be involved on the basis of evidence submitted before the Investigating Officer, the revisionist may move an appropriate application before the learned trial court under the relevant provisions of law.

¶17

In view of the above, there is neither any illegality nor irregularity in the impugned order. The criminal revision lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, it is dismissed .

¶18

(Abdul Shahid,J.)

¶19

March 16, 2026

¶20

M. Tarik

¶21

Digitally signed by :- MOHD TARIK High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Seema Gupta v. State of U.P. and 9 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Seema Gupta v. State of U.P. and 9 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shambhu Paswan and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Waseem Ahmad @ Waseem vs State of Up and Another

Ravi Prakash Vs State of U.P. and Another

Chhote Lal Maurya Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Kapil Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Priti Saxena Vs State of U.P. and Another