Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:27708 Court No. - 14 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3570 of 2025 Applicant :- Smt. Kiran Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko And 6 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Vakar Khan,Abdul Alim Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record. 2. The present applicant under Section 482 Cr.P.C./528 BNSS has been filed by the applicant with the following main reliefs: "i). to quash the impugned judgment and order dated 10.05.2024 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baharaich in Criminal Case No. 1014/2024 (State Versus Vinod Kumar & Others) arising out of Case Crime No. 456/2023, under sections 323, 504 & 506 IPC pertaining to Police Station -Huzurpur, District Baharaich as well as the impugned Judgment and order dated 23.11.2024 passed by learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Baharaich in Criminal Revision No. 241/2024 (Smt. Kiran Devi Versus State of U.P. & Others), as contained in Annexure No.1&2 to this application." 3. The brief facts of the case are that an FIR dated 14.11.2023 has been lodged by the applicant, who is the complainant, against the six named accused persons under Sections 147, 323, 379, 427, 452, 504 and 506 IPC alleging therein that there is a dispute between the husband of the applicant/complainant and between the named accused persons and the husband of the complainant two civil suits are pending before the competent court of law in which a status quo order has been passed but the named accused persons in violation of that order had harvested the crop of the husband of the applicant/complainant. When the applicant/complainant resisted the same, the accused persons threatened them for their life and had also beaten them. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant/complainant has submitted that the police after the investigation has filed charge-sheet only under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and the police has not filed charge-sheet against the three named accused persons namely Vinod Kumar, Vijay Kumar and Manoj Kumar and the charge sheet has been filed only against other three named accused persons. 5. It is further submitted that the applicant/complainant after filing of the charge-sheet has moved an application under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. for further investigation in the matter as the police had not fairly investigated the matter. The application of the applicant/complainant was rejected by the impugned order dated 10.5.2024 by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate. Against which a Criminal Revision No. 241 of 2024 was filed which was also rejected by passing an impugned order dated 3.11.2024 and feeling aggrieved by the same, the present application has been preferred. 6. It is further submitted that though it has specifically been mentioned in the application preferred by the applicant/complainant under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. that the documents forwarded by the applicant/complainant by post to the police had not been considered during investigation due to which the investigation was not made by the police fairly. The relevant extract from the application is quoted hereinbelow: "ममानननीय न्यमायमालय कके आदकेश कके अननुपमालन मम ददनमानांक 14.11.2023 कको पनांजनीकक त दकयमा गयमा दविविकेचनमा कमा कमायर उपदनरनीक्षक रमामतकेज कको सनुपनुदर दकयमा गयमा ददौरमान दविविकेचनमा दविविकेचक महकोदय कके दमारमा पमारर्थी दमारमा पकेदषित पतत्रों कको नटट दविविकेचनमा मम शमादमल दकयमा गयमा और नमा हनी दनष्पक्ष रूप सके दविविकेचनमा ककी गई और नमा हनी विमाददननी कमा बयमान अनांदकत दकयमा गयमा सनांपटरर दविविकेचनमा कमा कमायर दविविकेचक महकोदय कके दमारमा समाजजशन तदौर सके अनांजमाम ददयमा गयमा ।" 7. On being asked by the Court the learned counsel for the applicant/complainant, what documents were forwarded by the applicant to the police after lodging of the FIR, he has replied that khasra, khatauni etc. 8. On being asked by the Court again the learned counsel for the applicant/complainant, why it was not mentioned in the aforesaid application, what were those documents and what were its relevance during investigation by the police after lodging of an FIR by the applicant/complainant, even that was not disclosed in the application, he has replied that neither the detail of the documents nor its relevance has been mentioned in the application. 9. The Court again asked learned counsel for the applicant/complainant, whether any documents, which were as alleged to be forwarded to the police after lodging of an FIR, were mentioned in the said application or before the revisional court or even before this Court, he has replied that neither in the application nor before the revisional court or before this Court, the details of documents have been mentioned. 10. After hearing the learned counsel for the applicant/complainant and going through the record of the case, the position which emerges out is that the applicant, who is the complainant, has moved a frivolous application under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. by taking a vague and bald grounds in the application without enclosing any document and disclosing its relevance due to which it can be said that the investigation was not fairly conducted by the police. 11. In view of the fact and circumstances of the case, in the opinion of the Court, the order passed by the court below dated 10.5.2024 in Criminal Case No. 1014/2024 (State Vs.Vinod Kumar and others) arising out of Case Crime No.456 of 2023 under Sections 323, 504 & 506 IPC, P.S. Huzurpur, District Baharaich as well as the impugned judgement and order dated 23.11.2024 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Bahraich in Criminal Revision No. 241 of 2024 (Smt. Kiran Devi Vs. State of U.P. and others) do not suffer from any illegality, infirmity or irregularity, hence the prayer for quashing of the same is hereby rejected. 12. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is devoid of merit and it is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 12.5.2025 AKK Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench