Allahabad High Court
Nitin Kumar Gautam vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Cheif Secy. ... on 15 September, 2025
Author: Saurabh Lavania
Bench: Saurabh Lavania
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:56085
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1033 of 2025
Nitin Kumar Gautam
.....Revisionist(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Cheif Secy. Home/Prin.Secy. Home Lko. And Another
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Revisionist(s)
:
Wali Nawaz Khan, Suryansh Singh Suryavanshi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)
:
G.A.
Court No. - 11
HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
2. The present criminal revision has been filed for the following main relief (s):-
"WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed that impugned order dated 29.08.2025, passed by the Learned Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitapur whereby in Criminal Case No. 7190 of 2023 (State v. Mujeeb and Ors.) arising out of First Information Report bearing Case Crime No. 544 of 2023, Police Station- Kotwali, District- Sitapur under Sections 224, 511, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 420 Indian Penal Code, 1860 whereby the Learned Court has dismissed the Discharge Application of the Revisionist under Section 239 and Summoned the Applicant for framing of charge and all consequential proceedings, may kindly be quashed."
3. The revisionist has impeached the order dated 29.08.2025, passed in Criminal Case No.7190 of 2023 (State Vs. Mujeeb and others), arising out of Case Crime No.544 of 2023, under Sections 224, 511, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 420 I.P.C. at Police Station Kotwali, District - Sitapur. The order dated 29.08.2025, is extracted herein under :-
??????-29.08.2025
???????? ???????? ????? ????? ???? ?? ?? ?? ????? ????? ???????? ????-239?????????? ???????? ???????? ????? ??? ?????? ?? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ?? ???? ???
????? ?? ????? ???? ???? ???????? ?? ??????? ???????? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ??? ?? ?? ?? ????? ???????? ????? ???? ?? ???????? ??? ???????? ?? ?? ??? ?? ???? ????? ???? ??? ?? ?? ?? ????? ???? ?? ???????? ?? ?? ???? ??? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???????? ??????? ??? ???? ??????? ??? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??? ???????? ?? ?? ?????? ???? ?? ?? ????? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??????? ?? ???????? ?? ??? ???????? ????? ???? ?? ??? ??????? ?????? ?????? ?????????? ?? ????????? ????? ???? ??? ??, ?????? ???? ????????? ????? ?? ??????? ??????? ???????? ?? ???? ?? ?? ???????? ?? ??? ??? ??????? ???? ?? ????? ???? ??????? ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ????? ????? ???? ?? ???????? ???? ?? ???? ???? ?????? ??? ??? ??? ?????? ?? ???????? ???? ???? ?? ????? ?? ??? ???
????? ??? ??????? ??????? ??????? ?????? ????????????? ?? ?????? ????? ???? ??? ?? ??? ???????? ?? ??????? ???? ??? ?? ???? ???????? ??????? ???????? ?? ????? ???? ?? ??? ???? ??? ???
??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ???????? ?? ?????? ?????
???????? ?????? ?? ????? ???? ?? ?? ???????? ?? ??????? ???????? ????-224,511,467,468,471,120??, 420 ????????? ??? ???? ???? ??????? ???? ??? ?? ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? ?? ?????????? ?? ??? ????? ?? ?????????? ???? ??? ??? ????? ?? ?????? ?? ???? ???? ????????? ???? ??? ??????? ?? ???? ???? ???? ??? ?? ?? ??????? ?? ???? ?? ????? ????? ??? ???????? ?? ?? ??? ???????? ?? ?? ?? ????? ??????? ????? ??????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ???
????
???????? ????? ????? ???? ?? ?? ?? ???? ??? ??????? ????? ???????? ????-239?????????? ?????? ???? ???? ??? ???????? ?????? ???? ????? ?????? 12.09.2025 ?? ??? ???
4. The order has been challenged on various grounds including that the order is a non speaking as various aspect of the case pleaded in the application seeking discharge dated 25.08.2025 have not been considered for coming to the conclusion. The trial court has also not recorded the reasons, which are heart beat of an order, which ought to have been recorded. Learned counsel for the revisionist has also submitted that the discharge is a valuable right of the revisionist and the trial court ought not have rejected the application seeking discharge in a cursory manner.
5. On the issue of recording of reasons reliance has been placed on the judgment passed in the case of Basudev Dutta Vs. The State of West Bengal, (2024) SCC OnLine SC 3616.
6. On the issue of dealing with the discharge application reliance has been placed upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Kumar Rai Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2022) 15 SCC 720. The relevant paragraph is quoted here under :-
"15. Further, it is well settled that the trial court while considering the discharge application is not to act as a mere post office. The court has to sift through the evidence in order to find out whether there are sufficient grounds to try the suspect. The court has to consider the broad probabilities, total effect of evidence and documents produced and the basic infirmities appearing in the case and so on. [Union of India v. Prafulla Kumar Samal]. Likewise, the Court has sufficient discretion to order further investigation in appropriate cases, if need be."
7. Upon due consideration of the order quoted above as also the application seeking discharge (Annexed at Page Nos. 125 to 130 with this revision), it is apparent that the impugned order is non speaking order as for coming to the conclusion the reasons as required according to law settled have not been recorded by the trial court while rejecting the discharge application after considering allegations leveled in the FIR, evidence available against the revisionist and the grounds seeking discharge.Therefore, this court finds force in the arguments of learned counsel for the revisionist.
8. Accordingly, the instant criminal revision is allowed.
9. The order dated 29.08.2025, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitapur in Criminal Case No.7190 of 2023 (State Vs. Mujeeb and others), arising out of Case Crime No.544 of 2023, under Sections 224, 511, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 420 I.P.C., at Police Station Kotwali, District - Sitapur is hereby set aside.
10. The matter is remanded back to the Magistrate/Court concerned for passing order afresh on the application of the applicant seeking discharge, by a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law, as indicated above.
(Saurabh Lavania,J.)
September 15, 2025
ML/-
