Allahabad High Court
SHAKEEL AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
No criminal revision lies against an order directing investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC, and the revision is dismissed.
Summary
The petitioners filed a criminal revision challenging an order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baghpat, dated 25 March 2026, which directed the police to lodge an FIR under Section 173(4) read with Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The petitioners argued that the order was illegal and inappropriate. The State opposed, relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Father Thomas v. State of U.P. (2011) which held that no criminal revision lies against an order directing investigation under Section 156(3). The High Court examined the precedent and concluded that the Supreme Court’s ruling was binding. Consequently, the Court dismissed the criminal revision at the admission stage, holding that such a revision is not maintainable.
Issues considered
- Whether a criminal revision is maintainable against an order directing the police to lodge an FIR under Section 156(3) CrPC
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 156(3), 173(4)
Subjects
- criminal revision
- section 156(3) CrPC
- FIR
- Supreme Court precedent
- jurisdiction
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2909 of 2026
Shakeel And Another
.....Revisionist(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 5 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Quasim Khan, Shams Uz
Zaman
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 86
HON'BLE SUBHASH CHANDRA SHARMA, J.
This criminal revision has been filed against the order passed by
learned C.J.M., Baghpat u/s 173(4) B.N.S.S./156(3) Cr.P.C. by
which learned court has directed the police to lodge an F.I.R.
Learned counsel for the revisionists submits that the learned trial
court has passed the order in question dated 25.03.2026 which is
illegal and inappropriate and is liable to be set aside.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended
that Hon'ble Supreme Court has settled the law in this regard in
the case of Father Thomas vs. State of U.P. and another 2011
CRI. L. J. 2278 that no criminal revision is maintainable against
the order for lodging F.I.R. in an application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C.
Para-66 in the case of Father Thomas vs. State of U.P. and
another 2011 CRI. L. J. 2278 is as under :-
"66.As we have recorded a finding that no criminal
revision will lie against the orders passed by the
Magistrate directing investigation under section
156(3) Cr.P.C., no useful purpose will be served in
sending back the said Criminal Revisions to the Single
Judge bench hearing criminal revisions. The stay
orders have already been vacated by the Single Judge.
CRLR No. 2909 of 2026
2
All the connected criminal revisions accordingly fail
and are dismissed. There shall be no orders as to
costs"
In view of the law as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the aforesaid case, no criminal revision will lie against the
impugned order dated 25.03.2026 passed by learned C.J.M.,
Baghpat.
Accordingly, this criminal revision is dismissed at the admission
stage itself.
May 6, 2026
Ashok Gupta
(Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…