UPENDRA ALIAS SHERU ALIAS UPENDRA YADAV v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
A227/2146/2025 · 2025-03-04
Saurabh Srivastava
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 24406 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 24406 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:31786 Court No. - 79 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2146 of 2025 Petitioner :- Upendra Alias Sheru Alias Upendra Yadav Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Bed Kant Mishra,Neetu Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.
1. Heard Sri Bed Kant Mishra, learned counsel for petitioner and learned AGA for the State. 2. Present petition has been preferred with the following prayers:-
"(I) set aside the impugned order dated 28.01.2025 passed by learned Additional District & Session Judge/ F.T.C. 3rd Ballia, passed in Criminal Revision no. 228 of 2024 (Ramdahin Yadav vs. State of U.P. & others) and also further confirmed the order dated 25.09.2024 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ballia, passed in Complaint no. 423 of 2024 (Ramdahin Yadav vs. Upendra @ Sheru)."
3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is a meritorious student who has been selected in U.P.Police Constable Examination and only document verification/physical standard test is left. When this fact came into the knowledge of his uncle/opposite party no. 2, he made a false allegation against the petitioner by way of filing application/complaint on dated 02.08.2024 before learned court concerned under Section 175(3) B.N.S.S. wherein it has been stated that petitioner entered the house of opposite party no. 2 on dated 29.06.2024 and has beaten his wife and snatched her jewellery. Over the said complaint/application, learned court concerned called detailed instructions from the concerned police authority and thereafter on basis of material evidences on record, rejected the said application vide order dated 25.09.2024 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ballia in Case no. 423 of 2024. 4. Being aggrieved with the order dated 25.09.2024, opposite party no. 2 filed a Criminal Revision no. 228 of 2024 before learned Additional District & Sessions Judge/ F.T.C., 3rd, Ballia and challenged the order dated 25.09.2024. Thereafter, learned revisional court without considering all the relevant facts related to the aforesaid case, allowed the said revision vide impugned order
dated 28.01.2025 passed by learned Additional District & Session Judge/ F.T.C. 3rd Ballia and quashed the order dated 25.09.2024 and directed learned court concerned to again hear the matter and pass appropriate order, which has been challenged through the instant petition. 5.
Learned counsel for the petitioner challenged the impugned orders on several other grounds inter alia on the ground that revisional court without properly examining the record, quashed the order dated 25.09.2024 only by considering the fact that petitioner assaulted the wife of opposite party no. 2 while there is no medical injury report regarding such assault and as such the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 6. Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer sought through the instant petition and supported the order impugned. 7. For the purpose of the order which is being passed herein below, there is no need to issue notice to respondent no. 2. 8. After hearing the rival submissions extended by learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, this Court finds that vide impugned order dated 28.01.2025 only the matter has been remitted back to learned court concerned for deciding afresh and there is no such order or direction which may directly prejudice the petitioner, compelling him to prefer the instant petition and as such no prejudice has been caused to the petitioner as the matter is to be decided on merits afresh on the basis of the
discussion made in the order impugned. This Court does not consider it expedient to interfere because the petitioner cannot be said to be unduly aggrieved by such order of remand. No interference is required in the order impugned dated 28.01.2025.
9. However, it is made clear that pendency of Criminal Complaint no. 423 of 2024 (Ramdahin Yadav vs. Upendra @ Sheru) shall not be treated as a criminal proceeding pending against the petitioner for any purposes.
10. The instant petition stands disposed of accordingly.
Order Date :- 5.3.2025 Shaswat Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad