HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4435 of 2024 Court No. - 68 HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J. 1. List of fresh cases has been revised. 2. No one appears on behalf of the opposite party nos.2 to 4 whereas Sri Lavkush Kumar Bhatt, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State are present. 3. Present revision has been filed for the following relief: "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow the present revision and set-aside the order dated 10.07.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Farrukhabad, in Criminal Misc. Case No. 31 of 2024 (Vikram Singh Yadav alias Saurabh Vs. Mahila Constable Km. Usha and others), whereby the application filed by the revisionist under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was dismissed for non prosecution without deciding the same on merits. It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the court below to allow the present application filed by the revisionist under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and direct the concerned Police Station to lodge the F.I.R. and investigate the same under the appropriate sections and proceed against opposite party no. 2 and 4 in accordance with law, during the pendency of the aforesaid revision before this Hon'ble Court, and/or pass such other further order which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, otherwise, the revisionist shall suffer an irreparable loss and injury." 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that present applicant has filed application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. seeking direction to register an FIR against the private respondents. On that application, argument was heard on 29.02.2024, 13.03.2024 and 28.03.2024 but the court below has not passed any order and posted the same on 09.04.2024. On that date, applicant could not appear before the court below, therefore, the matter was posted on 29.04.2024. 5. Lastly, the matter was listed on 10.07.2024. On that date, an application for adjournment was submitted by learned counsel for Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Lavkush Kumar Bhatt Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Brij Mohan, G.A. Vikram Singh Yadav @ Saurabh Yadav .....Revisionist(s) State Of Up And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) the applicant because of the illness of the present applicant but the learned Magistrate instead of passing any order on the adjournment application, dismissed the application of the applicant u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. for want of prosecution. It is further submitted by the applicant that when the matter was heard on two occasions on the application of the applicant, court was required to pass an order but it kept on adjourning and subsequently dismissed the same for want of prosecution in absence of the applicant. 6. Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer and submitted that the application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. was pending since 16.01.2024. Though, the case was heard on two occasions, the applicant was given last opportunity to appear before the court but the applicant did not appear, finally the matter was dismissed for want of prosecution on 10.07.2024, therefore, there is no legality in the impugned order. 7. From perusal of record, it appears that while hearing the application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C., after seeking report from police, court was simply required to see whether cognizable offence is made out for the required direction to police to register an FIR but the record shows that though the matter was heard on 16.01.2024, 29.02.2024 and the matter was posted on 28.03.2024 and applicant was also present and matter was again adjourned for 09.04.2024. Therefore, there is delay also on the part of the concerned court in disposal of the application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. which does not require any detail or meticulous examination of the fact and on the date of passing the impugned order dated 10.07.2024, an adjournment application on behalf of the applicant was on record, the court below instead of passing any order on the adjournment application, rejected the application of the applicant filed u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. Therefore, order is absolutely erroneous and deserves to be set aside. 8. Accordingly, the order dated 10.07.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.3, Farrukhabad, in Criminal Misc. Case No. 31 of 2024 (Vikram Singh Yadav alias Saurabh Vs. Mahila Constable Km. Usha and others) is hereby set aside and the court below is directed to pass fresh order on merit on the application of the applicant filed u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. on the next date i.e. 24.09.2025. CRLR No. 4435 of 2024 2 9. It is made clear that if the applicant or advocate fails to appear before the court below in Criminal Misc. Case No. 31 of 2024, the court below is free to dismiss the same for want of prosecution. 10. With the aforesaid observation, the present revision is allowed. September 8, 2025 S.C. CRLR No. 4435 of 2024 3 (Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM CHAURASIA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad