Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:139836 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD (Sl. No. 8) Court No. - 78 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 33826 of 2024 Applicant :- Rekha Rani Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Subhash Chandra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J. 1. Heard Sri Subhash Chandra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajesh Kumar Gupta, learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of the order dated 29.8.2024 passed in Criminal Revision No. 113 of 2023 (Rekha Rani vs. State of U.P. & Others) and order dated 17.5.2023 passed in Misc. Application No. 102 of 2023 (Rekha Rani vs. Satendra Singh Yadav and others). 3. Pursuant to the order dated 29.7.2025, learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon a judegement and order dated 21.10.2024 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 14485 of 2024 (Vijay Singh vs. State of U.P. and 7 Others) wherein it is held that after remedy of revision before the Sessions court under Section 399 Cr.P.C., there is no bar in entertaining the 482 Cr.P.C. application before this Court; however such power is to be exercised very sparingly and only in cases where if the powers are not exercised by this Court, it would amount to abuse of process of court. 4. In the instant case, an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was filed by the applicant alleging therein that the other family member, namely, Rakesh Kumar, who is step brother of husband of the applicant had obtained a family register in which name of the applicant was excluded. It is further admitted in the said application that the applicant along with her in-laws was residing in some other village for the last 25 years. The allegation in the complaint is that the family register was issued by the opposite party no. 2 in collusion with opposite party no.3. The said application under Section 156(3) was directed to be treated as complaint case and after recording the statement of witnesses under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., the trial court vide order dated 17.5.2023 rejected the complaint filed by the applicant. Being aggrieved by the same, the applicant had filed a Criminal Revision No. 113 of 2023 which was also dismissed vide impugned order dated 29.8.2024. Being aggrieved by the same, the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed. 5. In view of the judgement relied upon by learned counsel for the applicant in Vijay Singh (supra), the application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be entertained in a routine manner being a second revision. It can be entertained only in exception circumstances where not exercising the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. would amount to abuse of process of law. In the instant case, only allegation is that the opposite party no. 2 has obtained the family register through opposite party no. 3 wherein the name of the applicant was excluded. The applicant has ample remedies under the civil proceedings to get her name included in the family register. In view thereof, in the considered opinion of this Court, there is no illegality in the judgement and order dated 17.5.2023 passed by the trial court as well as the order dated 29.8.2025 passed by the revisional court. 6. Accordingly, the instant application is dismissed. Order Date :- 18.8.2025 Kirti (Anish Kumar Gupta, J.) Digitally signed by :- SMT KIRTI MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad