HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 8657 of 2025 Court No. - 51 Sl. No. 218 HON'BLE ANISH KUMAR GUPTA, J. 1. Heard Shri Manoj Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri S. K. Ojha, learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The instant writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution has been filed for the following reliefs: "i) Set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 6.6.2025 passed by learned Addl. District and Session Judge/Special Judge POCSO Act, Court No. 3 District- Budaun in Criminal Revision No. 348 of 2024 (Virendra Kumar Mishra Vs. State of UP and others) as well as impugned order dated 6.12.2024 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Budaun in Misc. Case No. 50 of 2023 (Virendra Kumar Mishra Vs. Ramshree and others) under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. police station Bisauli District Budaun." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner herein had filed an application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. alleging therein that one Geeta Devi, who was the wife of his younger brother was murdered on 9/10.5.2021. Thereafter on the basis of forged will of deceased Geeta Devi, the property was got mutated by one Radhey Shyam and Ram Shree in their favour. Thereupon the instant application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was lodged by the petitioner herein. Vide order dated 6.12.2024 the said application has been directed to be treated as a complaint case. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Manoj Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Virendra Kumar Mishra .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that against the said order the petitioner has filed a Crl. Revision No. 348 of 2024 which has also been dismissed by the impugned order dated 6.6.2025 against which the instant petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed. 4. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the deceased Geeta Devi was the wife of his younger brother who has died on 1.8.1996 and thereafter the deceased was living with her mother-in-law and father-in-law and after their death, the respondents no. 2,3 and 4 in collusion with each other committed murder of Geeta Devi with intention to grab her property and without intimation to the petitioner the cremation of the deceased was done. Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that under what circumstances the deceased has died cannot be ascertained in a complaint case and it can be done only by way of proper investigation by the police. Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned orders are liable to be set aside and an FIR may be directed to be lodged against the respondents no. 2,3 and 4. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. relying upon the instructions submits that the Sub Inspector after due investigation has submitted a report according to which the deceased had died due to corona while treatment in the Hospital and at the time of her death she was residing with one Radhey shyam who was looking after all the property of the deceased, which has been duly verified by the police through the witnesses who used to take the land of the deceased on crop sharing basis (Batai/Adhiya). The aforesaid fact has been verified by the said persons. After the death of the deceased the respondents no. 2,3 and 4 had got the property mutated in their favour on the basis of the will executed by the deceased. Thereupon the instant application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner. Thus the trial court as well as the revisional court has taken a view that it was purely a civil dispute and the death of the deceased is a natural death during treatment in a Hospital during corona period. 6. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties this court has carefully gone through the records of the case. It is apparent from the police report which has been submitted after due investigation that the deceased had died due to corona while treatment in A227 No. 8657 of 2025 2 the Hospital and the time of her death she was residing with one Radhey Shyam, which has been duly verified by the witnesses who used to take the land of the deceased on batai/adhiya. The aforesaid fact has also been verified by the said persons. Thus the trial courts have rightly taken the view that the dispute is purely of civil nature and the death of the deceased in a natural death due to corona. In view thereof, this court does not find illegality or apparent error in the impugned orders and the same do not call for any interference by this Court. 7. For the reasons aforesaid, the instant petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. September 19, 2025 o.k. A227 No. 8657 of 2025 3 (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.) Digitally signed by :- OM KRISHNA CHOUDHARY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad