A227/5567/2025 of KASHISH MITTAL Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 5567 of 2025 Court No. - 89 HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J. 1.   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the private respondent, and Sri D.K. Rai, learned A.G. for the State respondent. 2.   This petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer to allow the miscellaneous petition (Camera) and set aside the order dated 21.9.2024 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Ghaziabad in Criminal Revision No. 0449 of 2024 (Veer Singh Chauhan vs. State of U.P. and Another), and further to set aside the order dated 24.11.2023 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 3, Ghaziabad in Criminal Complaint Case No. 454 of 2023 (Kashish Mittal vs. Veer Singh). He further prayed to allow this miscellaneous petition and set aside the order dated 21.5.2025 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad in the complaint case, and to direct the learned Magistrate to restore the complaint case to its original number. 3.   Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order dated 21.9.2024 passed by the learned Revisional Court is grossly illegal and liable to be set aside. The said order set aside the order dated 24.11.2023 passed by the learned Trial Court in Complaint Case No. 454 of 2023 ( Kashish Mittal vs. Veer Singh), whereby the respondent was summoned to face trial for the offence punishable under Section 500 IPC. It was contended that there was no illegality in the order dated 24.11.2023, which was wrongly interfered with and set aside by the learned Revisional Court. As such, the order dated 21.9.2024 is liable to be set aside. 4.   Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for the private respondent submitted that the impugned order is merely a remand order, and the petitioner has no locus to challenge the same, as the said order does not finally determine the rights of any of the parties. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Aanya Verma, Alok Saxena Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Kashish Mittal .....Petitioner(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) 5.   Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6.   It appears that the order dated 21.9.2024 was passed by the learned Revisional Court arising out of the order dated 24.11.2023 passed by the Trial Court. The order under Section 204 Cr.P.C. was passed without assigning any reasons. Even the Revisional Court neither discussed nor evaluated the allegations and the evidence available on record and arrived at its conclusion without proper evaluation of the statements of the witnesses recorded during the proceedings, which is per se illegal. 7.   Therefore, the impugned order dated 21.9.2024 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Ghaziabad, is upheld, and this petition is dismissed. May 12, 2026 Mukesh/Sushil A227 No. 5567 of 2025 2 Anil Kumar-X,J.) Digitally signed by :- MUKESH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad