RADHEY SHYAM BHARTI Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Ms. Pooja, Advocate, the learned counsel for the revisionist and the learned A.G.A. appearing for the State-respondent.

(2.) By means of the instant revision under Sec. 397/401 Cr.P.C., the revisionist has challenged the legality and validity of the order dtd. 21/9/2021 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Sonebhadra in Criminal Misc. Case No. 194 of 2021 whereby the revisionist's application under Sec. 156 (3) Cr.P.C. for issuing a direction for registration of an FIR, has been rejected.

(3.) On 28/7/2021, the revisionist had filed an application under Sec. 156 (3) Cr.P.C. alleging that he is a person belonging to the Scheduled Caste. He has let out some portion of his land to a mobile communication company which has installed a mobile tower on the land and has taken an electricity service connection for the same. The revisionist uses electricity for his domestic use from the service connection of the mobile company. The revisionist has let out a building constructed on another part of the said land to one Anuj Kumar for doing some work and electricity from the service connection of the mobile company is being used for that work also.