High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging FIR Registration — Revision Against FIR Registration Maintained.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR
  • 0
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner approached the High Court challenging an order dated 18.12.2025, where the Additional Sessions Judge quashed the order of the Judicial Magistrate First Class directing the registration of an FIR under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The petitioner contended that the FIR had already been registered on 08.04.2025 following the Magistrate's order on 29.03.2025, and thus the revision filed by the accused was not tenable. The respondents argued that the revision was maintainable as the charge-sheet was filed only on 18.08.2025, and the learned Revisional Court found fault with the Magistrate's order for lacking proper consideration of the affidavit supporting the complaint. The court analyzed the legal principles surrounding the maintainability of revisions post-FIR registration, referencing previous judgments including Kailash Dattatraya Jadhav v. State of Maharashtra and Arun P. Gid v. Chandraprakash Singh. It concluded that while a revision is maintainable, the appropriate remedy for the petitioner would be to challenge the FIR registration itself. The court ultimately dismissed the writ petition, affirming the Revisional Court's decision to remand the matter for fresh consideration while allowing the prosecution to continue.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure - Revision Against FIR Registration - Maintainability of Revision - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 397 - The court held that a revision against an order directing investigation under Section 156(3) is maintainable even after the FIR is registered, as the remedy is not prohibited. However, the efficacious remedy lies in challenging the FIR registration itself, as the prosecution cannot be quashed post-registration (Paras 12-16).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether a revision against an order directing investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure is maintainable after the registration of the FIR.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The High Court dismissed the writ petition, affirming the Revisional Court's decision to quash the FIR registration order while allowing the prosecution to continue.

Law Points

  • Criminal Procedure
  • Revision
  • FIR Registration
  • Judicial Discretion
  • Judicial Review
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (BOM) (09) 93

Criminal Writ Petition No. 122 of 2026

2026-09-08

Mehroz K. Pathan

C.R. Kulkarni, K.R. Lule, P.S. Kawale

Anand Radhakisan Somani

State of Maharashtra, Bhagwandas Bhavrilal Dagdiya, Sureshchandra Badulal Lahoti, Jamnalal Bhavrilal Baheti, Navalkishor Satyanarayan Charkha, Rajkumar Govindraprasad Mundada, Omprakash Murlidhar Charkha, Dr. Ashokkumar Shankarlal Bang, Madnalal Amarchand Gattani, Ashok Bhavrilal Chandkar

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging the quashing of an FIR registration order.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought to quash the Revisional Court's order.

Filing Reason

Challenging the legality of the FIR registration process.

Previous Decisions

The Revisional Court had quashed the order of the Judicial Magistrate directing FIR registration.

Issues

Maintainability of revision after FIR registration Judicial discretion in FIR registration orders

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that the revision was not tenable post-FIR registration. Respondents contended that the revision was maintainable and the Magistrate's order was flawed.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that a revision against an order directing investigation under Section 156(3) is maintainable even after the FIR is registered, but the efficacious remedy lies in challenging the FIR registration itself.

Judgment Excerpts

The court held that a revision against an order directing investigation under Section 156(3) is maintainable even after the FIR is registered. The learned Magistrate has failed to take into consideration the provisions of Section 175(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. The Writ Petition is, therefore, devoid of substance and is hereby dismissed.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the Revisional Court's order quashing the FIR registration order, which was passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 156(3), 397
  • Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: 175(3)
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Examines Seniority Dispute Under Andhra Pradesh Police (Civil) Subordinate Service Rules. Inter se Seniority of Sub-Inspectors to be Fixed on Completion of Training as per Rule 15.
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Assessee in Wealth Tax Act Case Regarding Trust Assets Held for Minor Children. Inclusion of Trust Shares in Net Wealth Denied as Settlement Was Not for Immediate Benefit of Minors Under Section 4(1)(a)(iii) of Wealth Tax Act, 1...