Disclaimer: This has been reported after the availability of the order of the Court and not on media reports so as to give an accurate report to our readers.
Allahabad High Court: In a revision filed for setting aside the order passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (‘Add. CJM’) whereby police were directed to register an FIR and investigate the same, a Single Judge Bench of Chawan Prakash*, J., held that Magistrate’s order under Section 156(3) of the CrPC, directing the police to register FIR and investigate, is not open to revision at the instance of proposed accused against whom neither cognizance has been taken, nor any process got issued.
In the present case, the Opposite Party 2 moved an application under Section 156(3) of the CrPC seeking registration of FIR against the revisionists. The Add. CJM allowed the said application and directed the police to register an FIR and to investigate the same. Aggrieved by it, the revisionist approached the High Court.
The Court stated that an order of the Magistrate made in exercise of powers under Section 156(3) of the CrPC directing the police to register and investigate was not open to revision at the instance of a person against whom neither cognizance had been taken, nor any process was issued. The Court further held that an order made under Section 156(3) of the CrPC directing a police officer to investigate a cognizable case was an interlocutory order and the remedy of revision against such order was barred under Section 397(2) of the CrPC.
The Court stated that because no criminal revision lies against the order passed by the Add. CJM in exercise of powers under Section 156(3) of the CrPC, the revision, filed by the proposed accused was not maintainable.
Thus, the Court dismissed the present criminal revision.
[Nahni v. State of UP, Criminal Revision No. 6131 of 2023, decided on 9-12-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the Revisionist: Rajesh Kumar Bind, Advocate
For the Opposite Party: G.A.