ORDER :- "Whether the revision against an order passed under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure directing registration of F.I.R. and investigation of the case is maintainable", is the main question that falls for consideration in this revision, which has been preferred against the order dated 20-4-2004 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 14, Gorakhpur in Misc. Application No. 140 of 2004, whereby S.H.O., P.S. concerned has been directed to investigate the case after lodging the F.I.R. on the basis of the application moved by Prof. Anirudh Prasad (opposite party No. 3).

2. The facts leading to the filing of this revision, in brief, are that Prof. Anirudh Prasad was the Head of Department of Law Faculty in Deen Dayal Upadhyay University, Gorakhpur in the year 2002-03. He moved an application (Annexure-1) under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C. for short) in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gorakhpur on 10-3-2004 with the prayer to direct S.H.O., P.S. Cantt., Gorakhpur to lodge the F.I.R. and investigate the case. Shorn of unnecessary details, the allegations made in that application, in brief, are that Km. Sanyogita Misra by playing fraud on the University, sought admission in L.L.B. 1st year in the year 2002-03 in OBC category on the basis of forged caste certificate in collusion with Prof. Ram Naresh Chaudhry and Dr. Girija Shanker Tiwari (both revisionists). Prof. Ram Naresh Chaudhry was the Dean of Law Faculty at the relevant time and when the applicant made complaints to University authorities, Dr. Girija Shanker Tiwari was the Dean of this faculty, who being fully conversant of all the facts, admitted Km. Sanyogita in L.L.B. 2nd year. It is further averred in the application that real name of Km. Sanyogita is Sanyogita Misra, who is the daughter of Raghuwar Dayal Misra, but she sought admission showing her name as Km. Sanyogita Chauhan daughter of Vibhuti Prasad Chauhan on the basis of forged papers, but in spite of complaint made by the applicant, Dr. Girija Shanker Tiwari permitted Km. Sanyogita to continue her studies and admitted her in L.L.B. 2nd year. After calling for the report from S.H.O., P.S. Cantt, Gorakhpur as well as the authorities of Deen Dayal Upadhyay University, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gorakhpur vide impugned order dated 20-4-2004 directed the S.H.O. concerned to investigate the case after lodging the F.I.R. and submit his report in accordance with law. Hence, this revision.

3. I have heard Sri V. P. Tripathi, learned counsel for the revisionists, learned A.G.A. representing the State of U.P. and Sri R. K. Ojha, learned counsel for Prof. Anirudh Prasad (opposite party No. 3).

4. At the very outset, it was submitted by learned A.G.A. as well as by learned counsel for the opposite party No. 3 that revision against the order passed under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. directing the police to investigate the case after lodging the F.I.R. is not maintainable, being barred by Section 397(2) Cr. P.C. It was also submitted that the proposed accused has no right to challenge the order allowing the application under Section 156(3) Cr. P.C. The contention raised by learned counsel for the opposite parties was that the order passed under Section 156(3) Cr. P.C. is an order of pre-cognizance stage, which cannot be challenged in revision at the instance of proposed accused. Next submission made by learned counsel for the opposite parties was that in pursuance of the impugned order, F.I.R. has been lodged at P.S. Cantt, Gorakhpur and a case under Sections 120-B, 419, 420, 467, 468 I.P.C. has been registered against the revisionists at crime No. 3/2004 and hence, on this ground, instant revision has become infructuous and any interference by this Court in that order will be unwarranted.

5. The learned counsel for the revisionists on the other hand contended that the order passed under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. directing the police to investiga

Click Here to Read the rest of this document