HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 5001 of 2024 Court No. - 68 HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J. 1. List has been revised. No one appears on behalf of the opposite parties. 2. Heard Sri Ashwani Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State. 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 this revision, and set aside the Judgment and order dated 2.08.2024 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (S.D.) Court No.4/Add. Chief Judicial Magistrate Gorakhpur in complaint Case No.3449 of 2024 Satya Prakash Pandey Vs. Sarvagya Muni Pandey registered under section 147, 395, 307, 504, 506 IPC in police Station Gagaha District Gorakhpur and issue summon to the opposite party no. 2 to 10 for the trial or to pass such other and further order which this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper under the circumstance of the case, otherwise the revisionist shall suffer loss and injury.” 4. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that while rejecting the complaint of the applicant, court below recorded the finding that a case u/s 302 IPC has been lodged against the brother and father of the present applicant. Therefore, proceeding in question appears to be initiated as counterblast as well as with mala fide but the court below has failed to consider that at the stage of taking cognizance on a complaint case, it is required to see that on the basis of material on record whether prima facie case is made out or not but the court below has not recorded any finding whether any prima facie case is made out or not. Therefore, impugned order is absolutely erroneous. 5. Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the prayer and submitted that the incident in question is the same incident on which the brother of the accused person was murdered and allegation was Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Ashwani Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Kamlesh Shrama Satya Prakash Pandey .....Revisionist(s) State Of U.P. And 9 Others .....Opposite Party(s) made against the brother and father of the present applicant. Therefore, there is no illegality in the impugned order. 6. Considering the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of record, it is not in dispute that for the incident dated 16.08.2020, an FIR was lodged against the brother and father of the present applicant u/s 302 IPC and present case also relates to the incident of the same date. But the court below while passing the impugned order has not recorded any finding whether on the basis of material on record, prima facie case is made out or not but simply on the ground that a case u/s 302 IPC has been lodged by the prospective accused person's side against the brother and father of the applicant, rejected the application of applicant. The reason for rejecting the complaint of the applicant u/s 203 Cr.P.C. is not correct as the complaint can be rejected u/s 203 Cr.P.C., if no prima facie case is made out against the accused person and no such finding was recorded by the court below. Therefore, while passing the impugned order, court below acted beyond his jurisdiction, therefore, impugned order dated 02.08.2024 deserves to be set aside and court below is directed to pass fresh order after considering the material on record in the light of the observation made hereinabove. 7. With the aforesaid observation, present application is allowed. September 8, 2025 S.C. CRLR No. 5001 of 2024 2 (Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM CHAURASIA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad