HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 5835 of 2024 Court No. - 81 HON'BLE ACHAL SACHDEV, J. 1. Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the opposite party no.2 to 5, is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Suneel Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the revisionist, Ms. Pratibha Singh, learned counsel for opposite party nos.2 to 5, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 3. Present criminal revision u/s 397/401 of Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the revisionist against the order dated 30.09.2024, passed by the learned Additional Session Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO Act)(Ananya), Jaunpur, in Complaint Case No.21 of 2024 (Murtaza Vs. Ram Sareek and Others), under section 203 Cr.P.C., Police Station Jalalpur, District Jaunpur, whereby the complaint of the revisionist/complainant u/s 203 Cr.P.C. has been dismissed. 4. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that revisionist moved an application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. on 25.09.2023, stating therein that on 19.09.2023 at 01.00 hours the opposite party nos.2 to 5 alongwith some police personnel have illegally occupied the revisionist's purchased land, abused and assaulted the minor daughter of the revisionist/complainant and torn her cloths. The daughter of revisionist/complainant was medically examined by the order dated 20.09.2023 of the District Magistrate, Jaunpur. Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Ashok Kumar Singh, Satyakam Dubey, Suneel Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Pratibha Singh Murtaza .....Revisionist(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Opposite Party(s) The revisionist/complainant had no hope of justice from the police station concerned, therefore, he moved an application before the Superintendent of Police, Jaunpur, through a registered post, but no action was taken, then the revisionist/complainant moved application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. before the court concerned with the prayer to register the case and investigate the matter. 5. Learned counsel for the revisionist further submits that learned trial court without considering the seriousness of the matter, illegally and wrongly passed the order dated 05.06.2024(Annexure No.2), by which the application U/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. moved by the revisionist/complainant was directed to be registered as a complaint case and next date 15.06.2024 was fixed for recording the statement of revisionist/complainant under section 200 Cr.P.C. 6. Learned counsel for the revisionist additionally submits that the learned trial court again fixed the dates 20.07.2024, 10.09.2024 and 30.09.2024, but neither the revisionist/complainant nor his counsel appeared before the trial court on the aforesaid dates due to lack of proper information by the counsel regarding the production of the evidence before the trial court. The trial court vide impugned order dated 30.09.2024, passed in Complaint Case No.21 of 2024 (Murtaza Vs. Ram Sareek and Others), under section 203 Cr.P.C., Police Station Jalalpur, District Jaunpur erroneously dismissed the complaint of the revisionist/complainant u/s 203 Cr.P.C., on the ground that the revisionist/complainant did not appear before the court on several dates. Furthermore, he neither recorded his statement u/s 200 Cr.P.C. nor recorded the statements of witnesses u/s 202 Cr.P.C. and in the said circumstances there is no ground to proceed against the opposite parties. 7. Learned counsel for the revisionist further contends that the impugned order dated 30.09.2024 has been passed by the learned trial court without issuing any prior notice to the revisionist/complainant and without giving any cogent reasons and findings on merits. The dismissal has been without the application of judicial mind, therefore, it is a fit case to be interfered by CRLR No. 5835 of 2024 2 this Hon'ble Court. 8. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 as well as learned AGA for the State has vehemently opposed the aforesaid submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the revisionist/complainant. It is contended that the learned revisional court has rightly passed the impugned order dated 30.09.2024 after affording the adequate opportunities to the revisionist/complainant to record his statement, as well as the statements of witnesses, and to adduce evidence in support of his case. However, despite such opportunities, the revisionist/complainant failed to appear before the court on various dates. Consequently, the impugned order dismissing his complaint on the ground of non appearance was rightly passed. 9. Heard Ms. Archna Chauhan, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Sanjeev Kumar Khare, learned counsel for the revisionist, Ms. Pratibha Singh, learned counsel for opposite party nos.2 to 5, Sri Jhaman Ram, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 10. A perusal of the impugned order dated 30.09.2024 reveals that the same was passed by the learned trial court without issuing any prior notice to the revisionist/complainant and without duly appreciating the circumstances which led to his non-appearance before the trial court. The order further appears to have been passed without assigning cogent reasons or recording proper findings on merits and without due application of judicial mind, particularly in the absence of the revisionist/complainant. 11. In the circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that the revisionist/complainant deserves to be afforded one more opportunity to appear before the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Jaunpur, in Complaint Case No.21 of 2024 (Murtaza vs. Ram Sareek and Others), under Section 203 Cr.P.C., Police Station Jalalpur, District Jaunpur, and to record his statement as well as the statements of his witnesses, hence the impugned order dated 30.09.2024, is liable to the set- CRLR No. 5835 of 2024 3 aside and revision is liable to be allowed. 12. Accordingly, the present revision u/s 397/401 Cr.P.C. is allowed and the matter is remanded to the trial court concerned to decide the matter afresh, after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the parties in accordance with law. 13. The impugned order dated 30.09.2024, passed by the learned Additional Session Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO Act)(Ananya), Jaunpur, in Complaint Case No.21 of 2024 (Murtaza Vs. Ram Sareek and Others), under section 203 Cr.P.C., Police Station Jalalpur, District Jaunpur, is hereby set-aside. April 24, 2026 VKG CRLR No. 5835 of 2024 4 (Achal Sachdev,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIJAY KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad