Kamlesh Meena vs State Of U.P.

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
DINESH PATHAK
Kamlesh Meena – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Ravi Kant, Vatsala
For the Respondent: Dharmendra Shukla, G.A., Sunil Kumar Singh

Table of Content
1. application of section 173 b.n.s.s. for f.i.r. registration (Para 2 , 4 , 5)
2. arguments on maintainability against direction to register f.i.r. (Para 7 , 8)
3. court's analysis on prior applications and presence of a cognizable offence (Para 9 , 12 , 13)
4. comparison of provisions under b.n.s.s. and cr.p.c. (Para 10 , 11)
5. implication of locus standi for prospective accused in f.i.r. investigation (Para 14 , 15 , 17 , 20)
6. final dismissal of application as non-maintainable (Para 22)

JUDGMENT :

Dinesh Pathak, J.

1. Heard Ms Vatsala, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Anil Tiwari, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Dharmendra Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 and learned AGA for the State respondent no.1, and perused the record.

2. The applicants have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 B.N.S.S. for quashing the impugned order dated 05.07.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act)/Additional Session Judge, Agra, passed in Criminal Misc. Case No.3140 of 2025 (Criminal Misc. Application No.251 of 2025) (Veerendra Singh Vs. G.M. Amrendra Kumar & Another), under Section 173 (4) of B.N.S.S., 2023, P