Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 73887 (ALL)

SMT. MANJU DEVI v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

A227/6939/2025 · 2025-07-13

Nand Prabha Shukla

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:112234 Court No. - 85 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6939 of 2025 Petitioner :- Smt. Manju Devi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Ms. Nand Prabha Shukla,J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. The instant petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:- "(i) issue a writ, order or direction to set aside the order dated 28.03.2025 passed by learned Additional Session Judge/Fast Track Court, Court No.1 Bulandshahr in Criminal Revision No. 262 of 2024 (Chandrapal @ Dharamveer Singh and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Another), Arising out from Complaint Case No. 282 of 2023 (Smt. Manju Devi Vs. Gulsan Kumar and Others) including the summoning order dated 02.05.2024 u/s 354Ga, 504, 506 I.P.C., (ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus by directed the learned court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No.2, Bulandshahr to proceed the Complaint Case No. 282 of 2023 (Smt. Manju Devi Vs. Gulsan Kumar and Others) u/s 354Ga, 504, 506 I.P.C. accordance with law;" It has been submitted that the petitioner moved an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., which was treated as a complaint case and the respondents-accused were summoned to face the trial. However, being aggrieved by the said summoning order, the respondents filed the revision which was allowed. The main submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the revisional court's order has been passed without application of judicial mind in a mechanical manner. After considering the submissions and from perusal of the record, it transpires that there is sufficient material available on record. The Revisional Court has not considered the statement of the complainant and the witnesses recorded on oath under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the order dated 28.03.2025 passed by the Revisional Court is hereby set aside and the order dated 02.05.2024 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, is hereby affirmed and the matter is remitted back to the Court below to proceed against the respondents/accused in accordance with law. With the aforesaid observations, the petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 14.7.2025/Aditya Tripathi Digitally signed by :- ADITYA TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad