HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 34357 of 2025 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE RAJ BEER SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This application under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita ( hereinafter referred to as 'BNSS') has been preferred against order dated 19.07.2025, passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mirzapur, in Case No. 86 of 2023 (Gaurav Yadav Vs. Soni Kumari @ Sunita and another), arising out of Case Crime No.12 of 2022, under Sections 384, 419, 420, 467, 468, 504, 506 IPC, P.S.- Kotwali City, District- Mirzapur, whereby on the protest petition of opposite party no.2, a direction has been made for further investigation of the matter. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that impugned order is against facts and law and thus liable to be set aside. It was submitted that applicant and opposite party no.2 had been in relationship and they have even married in a temple. The opposite party no.2 has lodged first information report making false and baseless allegations. One case was also lodged from the side of applicant against opposite party no.2. During investigation, both the parties have amicably settled the dispute and made statements to that effect. On the basis of said compromise, police have submitted final report in both the cases. Learned counsel submitted that in case lodged by the applicant, the final report has been accepted by rejecting her protest petition, whereas in the instant case lodged by the opposite party no.2, the learned Magistrate has made direction for further investigation. It was submitted that no case for further investigation is made out and the impugned order is liable to be quashed. 4. Learned AGA has opposed the application and submitted that there is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order. By impugned order merely a direction has been made for further investigation. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Satya Prakash Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Soni Kumari .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 5. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record. 6. It is well-settled that in case after investigation police submits a report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., the Magistrate has power to make direction for further investigation, wherever such situation is warranted. In the instant matter, police have submitted final report (closure report) on the basis of compromise between the parties. It appears that opposite party no.2 has moved the protest petition, making several allegations and thereafter learned C.J.M. has passed impugned order dated 19.07.2025 directing for further investigation in the matter. Learned Magistrate has considered all relevant facts of the matter and the direction for further investigation was made by a reasoned order. No material illegality or perversity could be shown in the impugned order. There is nothing to show that there has been any abuse of the process of court or miscarriage of justice so as to require any interference by this court by invoking extra-ordinary powers under Section 528 BNSS. The application under Section 528 BNSS lacks merits and thus, liable to be dismissed. 9. Accordingly, the application u/s 528 BNSS is dismissed. September 24, 2025 'SP'/- NA528 No. 34357 of 2025 2 (Raj Beer Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad