The Allahabad High Court has dismissed a criminal revision plea filed by Santreepa Devi challenging the rejection of her assault complaint. However, while upholding the trial court’s decision, Justice Harvir Singh expressed strong displeasure over the use of “filthy and abusive language” in judicial proceedings, directing that all judges in Uttar Pradesh maintain dignity and decorum in court records.
Background
The case stemmed from a complaint filed by Santreepa Devi of Varanasi, who alleged that she had been assaulted and that her mangalsutra was snatched at gunpoint by one of the accused, Deekshant Singh. The Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Varanasi, had dismissed her complaint in August 2024, citing lack of cogent evidence.
Dissatisfied, Devi approached the High Court, contending that the trial judge had ignored her testimony and that of her two supporting witnesses recorded under Sections 200 and 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). She argued that the medical report supported her version of being attacked.
Court’s Observations
During the hearing, the court noted inconsistencies between the complainant’s statement and those of her witnesses. “The statements of three witnesses lack coherence and continuity to make out a prima facie case,” Justice Singh remarked. The judge pointed out that while the complainant alleged a firearm was used, there was no corroboration from the other witnesses, nor clarity about the weapon that caused the minor injuries reported in the medical examination.
Read also:- Jammu & Kashmir High Court Quashes Preventive Detention of Jaffer Hussain Butt Under Public Safety Act
The court also accepted the State’s argument that “mere allegations without concrete evidence are not sufficient to summon the accused.”
However, Justice Singh took serious exception to the use of inappropriate language in the trial court’s order and in the recorded witness statements. He observed that “filthy and abusive words” had found their way into the record, contrary to repeated directions from the Supreme Court and the High Court itself. “The decorum and dignity of the post should be reflected in the language used in judicial orders,” the bench observed, reminding officers that judicial writing must remain civil even when recording offensive content from testimony.
Read also:- Karnataka High Court Dismisses 82-Year-Old’s Plea Over Disputed SC/ST Land Transfer Under PTCL Act
Decision
Finding no legal infirmity in the Special Judge’s order, the High Court dismissed Santreepa Devi’s revision plea as “devoid of merit.” Yet, Justice Singh used the occasion to issue a broader directive - ordering that a copy of his judgment be circulated among all judicial officers across Uttar Pradesh.
The court emphasized that judges must exercise restraint and avoid reproducing vulgar language from witness statements or pleadings. “This order,” Justice Singh clarified, “is passed in positivity, not negativity - as a reminder of the dignity expected from the judiciary.”
Case Title: Santreepa Devi vs State of Uttar Pradesh & Others
Case No.: Criminal Revision No. 4710 of 2024
Date of Judgment: September 10, 2025
