GUDDAN DEVI Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Lalit Singh Tomar, learned counsel for the revisionist and the learned A.G.A. for the State.

(2.) This revision has been moved on behalf of the revisionist for setting aside the order dated 09.08.2019 passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No.1, Auraiya, in Case No. 102 of 2019 (Guddan Devi vs. Manju Devi and Others), under section 156 (3) Criminal Procedure Code, Police Station- Dibiyapur, District-Auraiya whereby the Court below has rejected the application under section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. filed by the revisionist and did not direct the Station House Officer concerned to register the First Information Report against the opposite party nos. 2 to 4.

(3.) Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that a perusal of the complaint filed by the revisionist clearly discloses the commission of a cognizable offence. He, therefore, submits that once the application filed by the revisionist under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. disclosed the commission of a cognizable offence, the court below has illegally rejected the said application. He further submits that for the alleged incident, the revisionist has already moved an applications dated 30.06.2019 and 10.07.2019 before the S.H.O. concerned as well as the S.P, Auraiya respectively, which was not considered by the court below. In the case in hand the life and dignity of a young woman is involved. The learned counsel for the revisionist has contended with vehemence that the court below has passed the impugned order in a mechanical manner and has ignored the judgement of the Apex Court rendered in the case of Lalita Kumari Vs. Government of U.P. and others reported in 2014 (2) SCC 1.