Smt. Ranno Devi vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 16134 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:111974
 
Court No. - 93
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 914 of 2023
 

 
Revisionist :- Smt. Ranno Devi
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Revisionist :- Brajesh Kumar Solanki
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mohd Nadeem,Mohd Qasim
 

 
Hon'ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma,J.

01. Heard Sri Brajesh Kumar Solanki, learned counsel for the revisionist, Mohd. Nadeem, learned counsel for respondent nos.2 and 3 and Sri O.P.Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State.

02. This criminal revision has been filed against the order dated 18.01.2023 passed by learned Special Judge (POCSO Act)/ Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehpur, District Fatehpur whereby the application of revisionist filed under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. has been treated as complaint case in Criminal Misc. Case No.411/2022.

03. The facts relevant for the purpose of this revision are as below:-

The revisionist filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. with the allegation in nutshell that when she did not find her daughter by her side in the night of 10.06.2022 she began to search for her and found her at the bus stop. She interrogated her daughter and she disclosed that she came under the influence of Nadeem and Gurfan who have committed rape on her on false issuance of marriage. She told that on their assurance to solemnize Nikah with her she took Rs.7 lac and certain jewellery from her own house and that she has been searching him but they did not turn up.

04. Learned trial court after hearing the complainant dismissed the application filed under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. observing that probably there is a land dispute between two sides as disclosed from the preliminary enquiry report filed by the police station concerned. Learned trial court on the basis of judgment of this Court in the case of Ram Babu Gupta & others vs. State of U.P. and others 2001(2) JIC 231 (Full Bench), Sukhbasi vs. State of U.P. 2007 (2) U.P.Crl. 392 Alld. and judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Josheph Mathuri and others vs. Swami Schidanand Harisakshi 2002 Suppl. ACC 957 and Mohd. Yusuf vs. Smt. Afak Jahan 2006 (54) ACC 530 (Supreme Court) found it appropriate not to register the F.I.R. instead proceeded as compliant case. It is not so that once application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. is filed, the court has no option but to direct for registration of the F.I.R. and investigation.

05. In my view, the court has applied his judicious mind and has passed the order as per its own discretion. There is no good ground to interfere.

06. Hence the criminal revision is dismissed.

Order Date :- 22.5.2023

Asha