ANURAG SINGHAL ALIAS ANURAG SINGHAMversusSTATE OF UP AND 7 OTHERS

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

                 CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2371 of 2026

Anurag Singhal Alias Anurag Singham
                                                            .....Revisionist(s)
                                   Versus
State Of Up And 7 Others
                                                                 .....Opposite
                                                                       Party(s)

Counsel for Revisionist(s)           :   Anil Kumar Rai, Rishi Kant Rai
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)        :   G.A.

Court No. - 86
            HON'BLE SUBHASH CHANDRA SHARMA, J.

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as Sri Amit Kumar Singh,
learned A.G.A. on the point of admission.

The present criminal revision has been filed by the revisionist with prayer to
allow the revision and set aside the impugned order dated 24.02.2026 passed
by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 9, Varanasi in
Case No. 4452 of 2025 (Anurag Singham Vs. Deepak Sopra and others),
under Section 173(4) BNSS, Police station Kotwali, District Varanasi.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case, the
opposite party nos. 2 to 8 committed marpeet with lathi danda and inflicted
injury to Sarswati Devi while making trespass on the property in dispute
regarding which there is civil litigation pending before the learned civil
court. The injured Sarswati Devi became unconscious and was taken to the
hospital where her injuries were examined. The assailants took with them
two bags and Rs. 50,000/- those were placed there for expenses and also
snatched mangal sutra and bangles from Sarswati Devi. An application was
given at the police station but no action was taken then information in this
regard was sent to the Police Commissioner, Varanasi through registered
post even though no action was taken as a result an application under
Section 173(4) was BNSS filed before the learned trial court which was
treated as complaint vide order dated 24.02.2026. Further submitted that
from the contents of the application, cognizance offence is made out,
therefore, learned trial court must have directed the police to register the
case and make investigation but by treating it as complaint, the learned trial
                                                                                              CRLR No. 2371 of 2026
                                                                    2


                                    court has committed error, therefore, request to set aside the order passed by
                                    learned trial court and allow the revision and to direct the police station
                                    concerned to lodge an F.I.R.

                                    Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that since all
                                    the facts of the incident are in the knowledge of the revisionist and no any
                                    recovery or search is required to be made by the police. There is civil
                                    litigation between the parties regarding property in dispute. The learned trial
                                    court has considered all the facts and circumstances of the case and then
                                    passed the order in question. Even on disclosure of cognizable offence from
                                    the contents of the application, the learned trial court may treat the
                                    application as complaint. There is no bar and he is not duty bound to get it
                                    registered as F.I.R. There is no any illegality in the order dated 24.02.2026.

                                    On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made
                                    by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. perusal of
                                    record, contents of application under Section 173(4) BNSS and order passed
                                    by learned trial court dated 24.02.2026, since all the facts are in the
                                    knowledge of the revisionist and no recovery or search is to be made by the
                                    police, therefore, the learned trial court has treated the application as
                                    complaint following the law as settled by the Division Bench of this Court
                                    in Sukhwasi Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2007 LawSuit (All) 290 decided on
                                    18 September, 2007. It is also to note that the learned trial court has power
                                    under Section 202 Cr.P.C./225 BNSS to get the matter investigated if
                                    circumstances so require. In this way, there appears no any illegality or
                                    impropriety in the order dated 24.02.2026 passed by learned trial court but
                                    this revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed at the admission
                                    stage itself.

                                    Accordingly, the present revision is dismissed.

                                    May 7, 2026
                                    Anurag Singh
                                                                                 (Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
ANURAG SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad