Court examines procedural lapses under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and grants interim relief pending further affidavits.
In a significant development, the Allahabad High Court has stayed the operation of an order directing the registration and investigation of a First Information Report (FIR) under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), citing procedural non-compliance. The judgment was delivered by Justice Samit Gopal in response to petitions filed by Anuj Kumar Chaudhary and the State of Uttar Pradesh, challenging an earlier order by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sambhal.
The case arose when the Chief Judicial Magistrate allowed an application under Section 173(4) of the BNSS, directing the Station House Officer (SHO) at Sambhal to lodge an FIR related to a dispute involving petitioner Anuj Kumar Tomar. The petitioners argued that the complainant failed to follow the procedure outlined under Section 174(3) of the BNSS, corresponding to Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, which necessitates approaching the Officer In Charge of the police station before moving to higher authorities or the court.
During the proceedings, the counsel for the State highlighted that the complainant did not attempt to file the FIR at the police station level and directly approached senior officers and the court. They further contended that previous FIRs regarding the same incident had already been registered, and the court did not consider police reports providing detailed accounts of the incident.
The petitioners, represented by Ashutosh Kumar Sand and other legal counsels, also argued that electronic means for complaint reporting, as mandated by Section 173(1)(ii) and Section 173(4) of the BNSS, were ignored. They claimed that the proceedings were an undue harassment to the accused.
In opposition, the counsel for the complainant questioned the maintainability of the petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, emphasizing that the order in question was merely an administrative directive to register and investigate an FIR, which should not be interfered with. The complainant's counsel requested time to file counter affidavits to address these points substantively.
Justice Samit Gopal, acknowledging the complexities of the procedural aspects, granted a stay on the impugned order's operation, allowing time for filing counter and rejoinder affidavits. The court underscored the importance of adhering to procedural norms under the BNSS for FIR registration and investigation.
The matter has been adjourned for further hearing on March 24, 2026. Until then, the order dated January 9, 2026, by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sambhal, remains stayed.
Bottom Line:
Supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India - Court should not scuttle its jurisdiction while entertaining petitions, especially when procedural compliance for filing FIR under relevant law is in question.
Statutory provision(s):
Article 227 of the Constitution of India, Section 173(4) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, Section 174(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.
Anuj Kumar Chaudhary v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (Allahabad) : Law Finder Doc id # 2851318
