Allahabad High Court

MURTUZAversusState of UP AND 4 Others

Decided: 23 April 2026
Bench: ACHAL SACHDEV

Holding

The High Court dismissed the Section 482 petition as infructuous because the trial court’s discretion was proper and no criminal proceeding remained pending.

Summary

Murtuza filed an application under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code alleging that parties had illegally occupied his land and assaulted his minor daughter. The Additional District and Sessions Judge treated the 156(3) application as a complaint, dismissed it, and ordered a statement under Section 200. Murtuza then filed a petition under Section 482 seeking to set aside that order. The High Court held that the trial court had proper discretion to treat the 156(3) application as a complaint and noted that the complaint had already been dismissed, with a revision pending, leaving no criminal proceeding before the trial court. Consequently, the High Court found the 482 petition infructuous and dismissed it.

Issues considered

The maintainability of a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to challenge a trial court's order treating a Section 156(3) application as a complaint.
Whether the trial court has jurisdiction and discretion to convert a Section 156(3) application into a complaint case.
Whether the High Court can intervene when no criminal proceeding is pending before the trial court.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 156(3), 200, 203, 482

Subjects

Criminal Procedure
Section 156(3)
Section 482
Complaint case
Trial court discretion
Revision
Infructuous petition

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 24409 of 2024

Murtuza
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of Up And 4 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sanjeev Kumar Khare
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ashok Kumar Singh, G.A., Pratibha
Singh

Court No. - 81
HON'BLE ACHAL SACHDEV, J.

1. Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the opposite party no.2 to 5, today in
the Court, is taken on record.

2. This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the applicant with
the prayer to set-aside the order dated 05.06.2024, passed by the learned
Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge POCSO Act (Ananya),
Jaunpur, in Criminal Misc. Case No.57 of 2023 (Murtaza Vs. Ram Sareek
Gautam and Others), whereby the application of the applicant u/s 156(3)
Cr.P.C., Police Station Jalalpur, District Jaunpur, has been directed to
proceed as Complaint Case.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has moved an
application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. on 25.09.2023, stating therein that on
19.09.2023 at 01.00 hours the opposite party nos.2 to 5 alongwith some
police personnel illegally occupied the applicant's purchased land, abused
and assaulted the minor daughter of the applicant/complainant and torn her
cloths. The daughter of applicant/complainant was medically examined by
the order dated 20.09.2023 of the District Magistrate, Jaunpur.
The applicant/complainant had no hope of justice from the police station
concerned, therefore, he moved an application before the Superintendent of
Police, Jaunpur, through registered post, but no action was taken, then the
A482 No. 24409 of 2024
2

applicant/complainant moved application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
before the court concerned with prayer to register the case and investigate
the matter.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that learned trial court
without considering the seriousness of the matter, illegally and wrongly
passed the impugned order dated 05.06.2024, by which the application U/s
156(3) Cr.P.C. moved by the applicant/complainant was directed to be
registered as a complaint case and fixed the next date for statement of the
applicant/complainant under section 200 Cr.P.C.

5. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 as well as learned AGA for
the State has vehemently opposed the aforesaid arguments of learned
counsel for the applicant/complainant and has raised a preliminary objection
on the ground of maintainability of present application and has submitted
that the applicant has an alternative remedy to approach the revisional court
by means of filing revision against the impugned order dated 05.06.2024, by
which the application U/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. moved by the applicant was
directed to be registered as complaint case, hence present application is not
maintainable and liable to be rejected.

6. Heard Ms. Archna Chauhan, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Sanjeev
Kumar Khare, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Pratibha Singh, learned
counsel for opposite party nos.2 to 5, Sri Jhaman Ram, learned AGA for the
State and perused the record.

7. Perusal of the order shows that by way of order under challenge dated
05.06.2024, the learned trial court had treated the application under section
156(3) Cr.P.C. moved by the applicant/complainant to be registered as a
complaint case, and the aforesaid act of learned trial court Magistrate to treat
the application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. as complaint case is its
jurisdiction and discretion, as has been laid down by the Allahabad High
Court, in the case of Sukhwasi Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2008 Cri LJ
A482 No. 24409 of 2024
3

472 and in the light thereof the application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is ill founded. It
has been brought to the notice of the Court by the learned counsel for the
opposite party no.2 that the complaint was dismissed by the learned trial
court, against which the Criminal Revision No.5835 of 2024 was filed by the
applicant/complainant, which is pending before this Court and this Court has
noted the same facts in its order dated 24.11.2025 passed in the present
application, in the presence of learned counsel for the applicant. Since the
complaint case has been dismissed under section 203 Cr.P.C., there is no
criminal case pending before the trial court, in regard to which the
proceedings of trial court may be looked into, in the present application u/s
482 Cr.P.C. The proceeding U/s 482 Cr.P.C. are intrinsically relating to
saving of inherent power of the High Court, and the High Court has power
under section 482 Cr.P.C. to make orders as may be necessary to give effect
to any order under Cr.P.C. In absence of any pending proceeding before the
trial court in the said complaint case and it has never been brought to the
notice of the Court that the proceedings have been restored by any order of
the superior court, the present proceeding under section 482 Cr.P.C. has no
relevance and the present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has become
infructuous.

8. Accordingly, the present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed as
infructuous.

9. Certified copy of the documents shall be returned to learned counsel for
the applicant as per Rules.

April 24, 2026
VKG
(Achal Sachdev,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
VIJAY KUMAR GUPTA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…