Allahabad High Court
Raeis Ahmad vs State Of U.P. And 5 Others on 3 July, 2024
Author: Gautam Chowdhary
Bench: Gautam Chowdhary
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:107973 Court No. - 43 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3192 of 2024 Revisionist :- Raeis Ahmad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Gaurav Tiwari,Kuldeep Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The instant revision has been filed for setting aside the judgment and order dated 21.05.2024 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 15, Prayagraj in Application No. 46/XII/2024 (Raeis Ahmad Vs. Mujibuddin and others), whereby application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. moved on behalf of revisionist has been rejected.
3. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that perusal of the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. demonstrates that prima facie case is made out against the accused-opposite parties and therefore F.I.R. be ordered to be lodged against the accused persons and the matter requires to be investigated by the police, but the learned Magistrate has committed illegality in rejecting the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. in an arbitrary manner, and, therefore, the order impugned is liable to be set aside.
4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. submits that there is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order, which may call for any interference by this Court, thus the present revision is liable to be dismissed.
5. Perusal of the impugned judgment and order shows that the learned Magistrate while rejecting the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. moved on behalf of revisionist has observed that from the allegations made in the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. it is evident that dispute is regarding some property which is of purely civil in nature and not criminal, therefore, the application is liable to be dismissed. Thus, there is no illegality, perversity or impropriety in the order impugned and the same has rightly been passed by the court concerned after considering the entire material available on record. Moreover, the revisionist has failed to show any illegality or perversity in the order impugned, as such, no case is made out for interference. The present revision lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed.
6. Dismissed accordingly.
Order Date :- 3.7.2024 Mustaqeem.