Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 146087 (ALL)

Bano v. STATE OF U.P. THRU PRIN.SECY. HOME LUCKNOW AND ORS.

CRLR/659/2025 · 2025-06-16

Rajeev Singh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:35593 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 659 of 2025 Revisionist :- Bano Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow And Ors. Counsel for Revisionist :- Ashok Kumar,Chandra Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The instant revision has been filed by the revisionist praying as under:- "To quash the order dated 23.04.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, P.O.C.S.O., Lakhimpur Kheri in Crl. Case No. 199 of 2025. "To pass an order for filing first information report against opposite party nos.2 to 5." 3. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that the revisionist was beaten by the private respondents, regarding which, complaint was given to the police, but no action was taken. He further submits that in place of lodging the F.I.R. on the written complaint of the revisionist, the F.I.R. of the case in question bearing No. 175 of 2025 was lodged on the complaint of wife of respondent no.4 and preventive action u/s 126, 135 of B.N.S.S. was taken against the revisionist. He also submits that an application u/s 173 B.N.S.S. was moved by the revisionist, which was rejected in the most mechanical manner, hence, indulgence of this Court is required. 4. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer of the revisionist. He submits that report was called from the concerned police station and in the said police report, it is categorically stated that the incident was caused from the applicant's side and members of private respondents' side also received injury. He also submits that it is always open to the revisionist to move complaint case before the competent Court, hence, present revision is liable to be dismissed. 5. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the revision, impugned order as well as other relevant material, this Court is of the view that there is no illegality in the order passed by the trial Court. Therefore, this revision, being misconceived, stands dismissed. Order Date :- 16.6.2025 Arpan Digitally signed by :- ARPAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- ARPAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench