The court emphasized the importance of territorial jurisdiction and deterred abuse of process of law by imposing a fine on the petitioner, an advocate.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Mohammed Iftekhar Farooqui, Advocate learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Manish Goyal, learned Senior Advocate/Additional Advocate General, Sri S.K. Pal, learned Government Advocate, Sri A.K. Sand, learned Additional Government Advocate, all assisted by Sri Rupak Chaubey, Sri B.B. Upadhyay, Sri S.B. Maurya and Sri Raj Kumar Gupta, learned counsels for the State of U.P. and perused the records.

2. The present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by Naval Kishor Sharma, S/o Deonath Sharma with the following prayers :-

“It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to set aside the judgement and order dated 26.4.2022 passed by Sessions Judge, Mau in Criminal Revision No. 54 of 2022, Nawal Kishor Sharma Versus State of U.P. as well as judgement and order dated 11.03.2022 passed by Civil Judge (S.D.)/Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate/M.P. M.L.A. Court, Mau in Misc. Case No.128 of 2019, Nawal Kishore Sharma Vs. Ajay Singh Vishtha @ Yogi Adityanath. Otherwise petitioner would suffer with irreparable loss.

It is further prayed that the court below may be directed to register complaint case against respondent no.2 and hear the matter accordingly.

Or may pass any such further order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.”

3. The brief facts of the case are that a complaint dated 11.1.2019 was filed by the petitioner against Ajay Singh Bist alias Yogi Adityanath for offences under Section 295 (A), 298, 419, 420, 501 IPC, Police Station Dohrighat, District Mau titled as Naval Kishor Sharma Versus Ajay Singh Bist alias Yogi Adityanath mentioning therein the date of occurrence as 28.11.2018, the names and addresses of the witnesses as Naval Kishor (complainant), Yugal Kishore Sharma, S/o Devnath Sharma, Santosh Prajapati, S/o Sidhari Prajapati and other witnesses and record keeper Superintendent Police, Mau alleging therein that the respondent-accused is a Mahant of Gorakshapeeth, Gorakhnath, Police Station Gorakhnath and at present the Chief Minister, Government of Uttar Pradesh. On 28.11.2018, he addressed a public meeting with regards to general Vidhan Sabha Elections in Malakheda, Alwar (Rajasthan) in which he stated certain words for Lord Bajrangbali due to which the religious sentiments of public who are followers of Sri Bajrangbali have been hurt. The respondent knowing that his speech will cause hurt to the sentiments of a specific group of people has stated about it in his general public meeting. He has also caused disrepute to his position as Chief Minister which is a constitutional post and has also not followed the circular issued by the Election Commission, Government of India. The said acts have been done by him for benefits in a wrongful manner to his party in elections and also to separate two group of persons so that they may start hating each other and may fight. The said fact has been read by the complainant and other persons in daily newspapers due to which the religious sentiments of other persons also got hurt. A legal notice dated 30.11.2018 was sent by the complainant but despite service of notice calling upon the respondent to tender apology to the public in writing and orally, he did not do it and by taking law in his hands the presiding deity of the complainant has been humiliated and to cause gain to his political party, humiliated Lord Bajrangbali in a public meeting. The faith of the complainant has been hurt. The complainant tried to lodge a report at the local police station and also gave a report to the Superintendent of Police, Mau on 1.1.2019 but no action has been taken and hence he has filed the present complaint. He prays that after taking the evidence, the accused be punished for offences under Section 295 (A), 298, 419, 420, 501 IPC.

4. In support of the complaint, the complainant was examined under Section 200 Cr.P.C. wherein he reiterated the version of t