Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:42372 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 15181 of 2019 Petitioner :- Lok Nath Mishra Respondent :- District And Session Judge Bahraich And Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Manish Kumar Shukla,Yogesh Kumar Misra Counsel for Respondent :- Gyanendra Pathak Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Gyanendra Pathak, learned counsel who appeared for private opposite parties and perused the record. 2. The present petition has been filed seeking the following relief. "(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari thereby quashing the impugned order dated 20.08.2015 passed by opp. party no.1 in Cri. Revision No.222/2015, in Re; Loknath Mishra versus Ravindra Nath Pathak, P.S. Ekauna, Bahraich, as contained in Annexure No.2." 3. Upon due consideration, this Court is not inclined to accede the relief sought, quoted above, in the present petition. It is for the following facts/reasons:- (i) The petitioner earlier approached this Court by means of Writ Petition No.9802 (M/S) of 2016 challenging the order dated 20.08.2015, passed by Session Judge, Bahraich (in short 'Revisional Court') in Criminal Revision No.222 of 2015 (Loknath Mishra Vs. Ravindra Nath Pathak). (ii) The Criminal Revision No.222 of 2015 (Lokhnath Mishra Vs. Ravindra Nath Pathak) was filed before the court concerned challenging the order(s) dated 25.02.2014 and 18.02.2014. (iii) Vide order dated 06.05.2016 this Court dismissed the Writ Petition (M/S) No. 9802 of 2016 with liberty to the petitioner to file fresh petition. (iv) In the instant petition it has not been disclosed as to what reliefs were sought in the said writ petition. To the view of this Court, in absence of specific averments, the order dated 25.02.2014 and 18.02.2014, passed in Complaint Case No.939 of 2006, ought to have been challenged in the writ petition indicated above. (v) Earlier Writ Petition No.9802 (M/S) of 2016 was dismissed on 06.05.2016 with liberty to file a fresh petition and thereafter the present petition was presented before the Registry of this Court on 24.05.2019 without explaining laches of more than three years. (vi) The petitioner could not produce the evidence in the complaint case and, therefore, the Magistrate vide order dated 07.02.2009 closed the evidence of the petitioner. (vii) Order dated 07.02.2009 was challenged by the petitioner by means of Criminal Revision No.68 of 2009 (Loknath Mishra Vs. Ravindra Nath Pathak & others). This revision was allowed vide order dated 15.10.2013, whereby the order dated 07.02.2009 was set aside and petitioner was permitted to adduce his evidence before the Magistrate. (viii) Despite the liberty provided by the Revisional Court vide order dated 15.10.2013, the petitioner failed to adduce his evidence, therefore, on 23.11.2013 the case was adjourned to 23.12.2013. (ix) As appears from the record, the complaint case was fixed for 23.12.2023 and 29.01.2014 and on both the dates the petitioner did not adduce his evidence and moreover on 29.01.2014 neither he appeared in the complaint case before the Magistrate nor he moved any application seeking adjournment. In this background of the case, the Magistrate rejected the recall application dated 25.02.2014 vide order dated 18.02.2015. 4. The petition, in view of the aforesaid facts/reasons, is dismissed. Order Date :- 23.7.2025 Anand/- Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench