Dismissed¶18

Divy Prakash and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC10 Feb 2026NA528/354/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Maintainability of Section 528 BNSS application against Magistrate's direction to register FIR at pre-cognizance stage — accused not aggrieved; remedy lies against FIR after registration, not against the direction — Divy Prakash v. State of U.P., Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, February 10, 2026; Sections 528 and 173(4) BNSS; Misc. Case No.452 of 2025, ACJM-III, Ayodhya; application rejected.

What did the court decide?

A direction to lodge an FIR is at the pre-cognizance stage and the accused is not aggrieved by such a direction. ¶14

Divy Prakash and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 354 of 2026

¶3

Divy Prakash And Another

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s)

¶7

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arun Kumar Pandey, Saurabh Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶8

Court No. - 16

¶9

HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned Additional Government Advocate and perused the record.

¶11

By means of this application, the applicants have prayed for setting aside the impugned order dated 05.01.2026 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-III, Ayodhya (in short "Magistrate") in Mic. Case No.452 of 2025.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the order impugned has been passed without application of mind. He has further submitted that police report was called by the Magistrate and it has been informed by the police that already one case was lodged for the offence in question. Therefore, no FIR can be lodged subsequently for the same cause of action.

¶13

He has further submitted that matter involves civil dispute to which criminal colour has been given and impugned order cannot be sustained.

¶14

After perusal of the order impugned dated 05.01.2026, it is clear that application under Section 173(4) BNSS preferred by opposite party no.2 has been allowed wherein the Magistrate has passed the order that the application under Section 173(4) BNSS is accepted and concerned police station is directed to lodge the FIR. It is a settled law that direction of lodging of FIR is pre-cognizance stage and accused is not aggrieved.

¶15

NA528 No. 354 of 2026

¶16

¶17

Once the FIR is lodged then he may be aggrieved and he can challenge the FIR but prior to that, he cannot challenge the order impugned by which direction has been given to register the FIR.

¶18

The application is devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected .

¶19

(Brij Raj Singh,J.)

¶20

February 10, 2026

¶21

Mohit Singh/-

¶22

Digitally signed by :- MOHIT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Divy Prakash and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Divy Prakash and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

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

Santosh Kumar Pandey and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajkaran Chaurasiya and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Dilip Singhh and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Prem Narayan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Siyaram @ Siyaram Godiya vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Shubham Agarwal and 5 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others