HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4124 of 2025 Court No. - 47 HON'BLE SIDDHARTH, J. Heard Sri Mithlesh Kumar, learned counsel for the revisionist; Sri Sharad Kumar Srivastava, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Ranjit Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 and perused the trial court record. This criminal revision has been filed against impugned charge-sheet no.A-91 of 2023 dated 18.08.2023 as well as entire criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No.46 of 2024 (State Vs. Shivanshu @ Harsh) arising out of Case Crime No.88 of 2023, under Sections 325, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Teji Bazar, District Jaunpur as well as cognizance and summoning order dated 05.03.2024 passed by Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Jaunpur in aforesaid criminal case. Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that the charge sheet has wrongly been submitted against the revisionist that true fact of the case is that prior to lodging the present first information report, the mother of the revisionist namely, Reena Devi, had also lodged a first information report registered Case Crime No. 0087 of 2023, Under Sections- 323, 504, 506 I.P.C and Section-3(2)(va) of S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989 (Amendment 2015) at Police Station- Teji Bazar; District- Jaunpur against the present present complainant and his brother, Vijay, on 21.07.2023 at about 22:28 O'clock. From the perusal of the aforesaid first information report, it is crystal clear that in counterblast of the First Information Report of the mother of the revisionist namely, Reena Devi, the present complainant has lodged the impugned first information report against the revisionist and his other family members which is bad in the eye of the law. Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Km. Madhubala, Mithilesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Indra Jeet Yadav X Juvenile .....Revisionist(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) From the perusal of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is crystal clear that on the aforesaid false and frivolous grounds, the aforesaid first information report has been lodged by the informant/opposite party No.2 against the revisionist and his other family members which is illegal hence impugned charge sheet dated 18.08.2023 and cognizance and summoning order dated 05.03.2024 are liable to be quashed by this Court in the interest of justice. The revisionist is student of class-10th and he has already passed the class-9th examination. It is necessary to bring to the notice of this Hon'ble Court that on the date of alleged incident dated 21.07.2023, the revisionist was not present on the place of occurrence because in the evening of 20.07.2023 due to suffering from hyper viral fever with hepatitis, the revisionist was admitted in Jeevan Deep Hospital, Naiganj (Near Kumar Petrol Pump), Jaunpur and was ill till 24.07.2023, hence the allegation leveled against the revisionist is false and concocted. There is no evidence on record to prove that the revisionist has committed any offence under Sections- 325, 323, 504 IPC in the present case. Learned A.G.A and learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 have vehemently opposed the prayer made by counsel for the revisionist. They have submitted that the grounds raised by counsel for the revisionist for challenging the charge sheet require evidence for quashing the charge sheet. There is no law pointed out by the counsel for the revisionist. After hearing the rival submissions, this court finds that charge sheet can only be quashed where no offence is disclosed against the accused; the allegations are so absurd or improbable that no prudent person will believe that there is a case made out; there should be express prohibition in any law prohibiting continuation of such proceedings; the prosecution is demonstrated to be malafide and in abuse of process of law. In the present case, only the ground of malafide is alleged against the other side as a ground for quashing the charge sheet, which requires to be proved by cogent evidence. In view of the above, there is no ground made out for quashing the charge sheet in dispute. The criminal revision lacks merit and is accordingly, dismissed. September 25, 2025 Rohit CRLR No. 4124 of 2025 2 (Siddharth,J.) Digitally signed by :- ROHIT DAS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad