Balkrishna v. State of U.P & Anr.

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

Heard Sri Arun Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Babu Lal Ram, Advocate holding brief of Sri Arjun Singh Yadav, learned counsel for respondent no. 2 as well as learned AGA for the State.

The instant petition has been preferred for challenging the order dated 07.11.2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Fatehpur in Criminal Revision No. 123 of 2023 (Smt. Shiv Kumari Vs. Kamlesh and Others).

It is the case of petitioner that initially respondent no. 2 filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. against the petitioner and six other persons in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehpur with false allegations which was registered as complaint case, thereafter learned concerned court recorded the statement under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. After considering the complaint and statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., the learned Magistrate vide its order dated 04.09.2023 dismissed the complaint under Section 203 Cr.P.C. Being aggrieved with the order dated 04.09.2023, the respondent no. 2 preferred Criminal Revision No. 123 of 2023 which was allowed by learned Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Fatehpur vide order dated 07.11.2024 and remanded the case back to learned Magistrate with direction to pass fresh order as per directions mentioned in learned revisional court's order, which impugned the present petition.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the concerned court without considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in a routine manner, allowed the Criminal Revision preferred at the behest of the respondent no. 2, which is totally illegal and arbitrary.

Per contra, Sri Babu Lal Ram, Advocate holding brief of Sri Arjun Singh Yadav, learned counsel for respondent no. 2 as well as learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer made through the instant petition and rebutted the stand taken up by learned counsel for petitioner and submitted that after considering the material on record, learned concerned court passed the impugned order and as such, there is no illegality in the same.

After having the rival contentions raised by learned counsel for parties, the order impugned dated 07.11.2024 passed by the learned revisional court i.e., learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Fatehpur is hereby modified to the extent that fresh arrival of learned Magistrate shall not be dependent upon the finding recorded by learned revisional court, but it is made clear that in compliance to order passed by learned revisional court through which the matter has been remanded back to the learned Magistrate for deciding a fresh, shall be dependent upon free conscious of legal acumen and material available on records.