Allahabad High Court
PRIYANKA ADVOCATEversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- MANOJ BAJAJ
Holding
The High Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the revision petition directly in the absence of exceptional circumstances; the petition is dismissed.
Summary
Priyanka Advocate filed a revision petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baghpat, which dismissed her application under Section 173(4) of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for registration of an FIR. The petition sought direct high‑court revision of the magistrate’s order. The Court examined whether the High Court could entertain the revision directly or whether the petitioner must first approach the Sessions Court, noting that the statute provides concurrent jurisdiction but ordinarily requires the remedy of revision before the Sessions Court. The Court found that the petitioner had not shown any exceptional circumstance justifying bypassing the Sessions Court. Consequently, the High Court declined to entertain the revision, but granted liberty to file a revision before the Sessions Court within three weeks, and disposed of the petition.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to entertain a revision petition directly against the order of a Chief Judicial Magistrate under the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the petitioner has demonstrated exceptional circumstances that warrant invoking the High Court’s revisional jurisdiction.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 173(4)
Subjects
- revision jurisdiction
- criminal procedure
- FIR registration
- concurrent jurisdiction
- high court jurisdiction
- exceptional circumstances
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 5709 of 2025
Priyanka Advocate
.....Revisionist(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Anurag Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Anuj Srivastava, G.A., Manas Tripathi
Court No. - 85
HON'BLE MANOJ BAJAJ, J.
Petitioner has filed this revision petition to challenge the impugned order
dated 01.07.2025 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baghpat in
Criminal Misc. Case No. 507 of 2025, titled Priyanka Advocate vs.
Rajesh Goyal and others, whereby application under Section 173(4)
Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed by complainant for
registration of F.I.R. and investigation by police in respect of alleged
commission of cognizable offence has been dismissed.
No doubt, the impugned order dated 01.07.2025 is revisable at the
instance of complainant, if such a complaint is dismissed, but the statute
has conferred concurrent jurisdiction of revision with the court of sessions
as well as the High Court. In the considered opinion of this Court,
ordinarily a litigant must avail the remedy of revision before the court of
sessions, and only under exceptional circumstances, the revisional
jurisdiction of this Court can be invoked.
A perusal of the grounds pleaded in the revision petition would show that
no exceptional ground is made out by the petitioner-complainant for
straightway invoking the revisional jurisdiction of this Court against the
impugned order dated 01.07.2025 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate.
Thus, this Court is not inclined to entertain the revision petition, however,
a liberty is granted to the complainant-petitioner to file the revision
petition before the Court of Sessions, and if, it is filed within next three
weeks, the same shall be decided on merits.
CRLR No. 5709 of 2025
2
The revision petition is disposed of.
(Manoj Bajaj,J.)
September 8, 2026
Kirti
Digitally signed by :-
SMT KIRTI MISHRA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…