Allahabad High Court
SATYENDRA KUMARversusSTATE OF UP AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The petition under Article 227 is not maintainable and is dismissed.
Summary
The petitioner Satyendra Kumar filed an Article 227 petition in the Allahabad High Court seeking to set aside an order dated 21 March 2025 of the Additional Sessions Judge and a subsequent order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate dated 20 November 2023, which had dismissed his protest petition in a criminal complaint. The respondents argued that the petition was not maintainable because the petitioner had earlier filed an application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), which was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to approach the appropriate court. The High Court examined the earlier dismissal and held that the petitioner had been given liberty to pursue the matter through the proper channel, rendering the present Article 227 petition redundant. Consequently, the court concluded that the petition was not maintainable. The petition was therefore dismissed.
Issues considered
- What is the maintainability of an Article 227 petition when the petitioner has previously filed and withdrawn an application under Section 528 BNSS with liberty to approach the appropriate court?
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 528
Subjects
- Article 227
- maintainability
- High Court jurisdiction
- Section 528
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- criminal revision
- petition dismissed
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 13937 of 2025
Satyendra Kumar
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of Up And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Kuldeep Singh Chahar
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Ashish Kumar Srivastava, G.A.
Court No. - 89
HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J.
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Ashish Kumar Srivastava,
learned counsel for the private respondents, and Shri Devesh Kumar
Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State are present.
2. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been
filed with the following main prayer :-
"1. It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble court may graciously be
pleased to allow this application and set aside the impugned order dated 21.03.2025
passed by Additional Sessions Jude No.4), Mathura in Criminal Revision No.623 of
2013 (Satyendra Kumar Versus State of UP. and others) and order dated 20.11.2023
passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathura in Complaint Case No.3019 of 2021
(Satyendra Kumar Versus Madhu Sharma and others), Police Station-Kotwali, District
Mathura by way of which the protest petition of the applicant/ revisionist has been
rejected.
2. It is further prayed that this Hon'ble court kindly may be please to summon the
respondent no.2 to 4 for facing the trial for the offence committed by them according
to the complaint Case No.3019 of 2021 (Satyendra Kumar Versus Madhu Sharma and
others), Police Station-Kotwali, District-Mathura. And/or pass such other and further
orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper."
3. A preliminary objection has been raised by learned counsel for the
private respondents that this petition is not maintainable as the petitioner
had earlier challenged the same impugned orders in Application u/s 528
BNSS No.28915 of 2025, which was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty
A227 No. 13937 of 2025
2
to file appropriate application/proceeding before the court concerned.
4. The order dated 7.8.2025 passed in Application u/s 528 BNSS
No.28915 of 2025 (Satyendra Kumar vs. State of U.P. & 3 Ors.) is as
follows:-
"Heard Sri Kuldeep Singh Chahar, learned counsel for applicant and Sri Kamleshwar
Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present application under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita has
been filed to quash the order dated 21.03.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions
Judge, Court No.4, Mathura in Criminal Revision No. 623 of 2023 (Satyendra Kumar
Vs. State of U.P. and others), whereby the revisional court has affirmed the order
dated 20.11.2023 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathura in Complaint Case
No.3019 of 2021 (Satyendra Kumar Vs. Madhu Sharma and others), whereby the
protest petition has been dismissed.
"After some argument, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present
application under Section 528 BNSS may be dismissed as not pressed with liberty to
the applicant to file appropriate application/proceeding before the court concerned.
In view of the statement of learned counsel for the applicant, the present application
528 BNSS is dismissed as not pressed with liberty to the applicant to file appropriate
application/proceeding before the court concerned.
Office is directed to return the certified copy of impugned order to learned counsel for
the applicant."
5. Therefore, in the light of the order passed by this Court dismissing
Application u/s 528 BNSS No.28915 of 2025 filed by the petitioner as
withdrawn with liberty to file an file appropriate application/proceeding
before the court concerned, this petition is not maintainable. It is,
accordingly, dismissed.
(Anil Kumar-X,J.)
May 7, 2026
SK
Digitally signed by :-
SUSHEEL KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…