SL. No. Dat e Of f ice Not es, r epor t s, or ders or pr oceedin gs or dir ect ion s an d Regist r ar’s or der w it h Sign at u r es COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS 2025:UHC:10823 C482 No.2320 of 2023 Hon ’ble Ash ish Nait h an i, J. Mr. Mohd. Umar, learned counsel for the Applicant. 2. Mr. N.S. Kanyal, learned AGA, for the State of Uttarakhand/1. 3. Mr. Piyush Sammal, learned counsel for the Respondent Nos.2. 4. The Court has heard learned counsel for the Applicant and learned Government Advocate for the State and has perused the record of the present application instituted under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of Charge Sheet No. 556 of 2020 dated 27.12.2020, the summoning order dated 04.02.2021, and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1426 of 2021, State versus Mamta Shahi, pending before the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haldwani. 5. At the outset, it is necessary to note that the very same reliefs, arising from the same charge sheet, same FIR, and same criminal case, were earlier the subject matter of C-482 No. 1480 of 2021, filed by the present Applicant. The said application was considered and finally disposed of by the coordinate Bench on 23.11.2022 after hearing the parties, with specific directions regarding the remedy available to the Applicant. 6. The record leaves no manner of doubt that the earlier petition was decided on merits and the criminal proceedings now questioned were already examined. Once an application under Section 482 has been adjudicated, a second application invoking the very same jurisdiction against the same proceedings is not maintainable. Section 482 cannot be used to re-agitate issues already concluded, nor can it serve as a substitute for recall or review, which the Code does not contemplate in respect of criminal orders. 7. Apart from the bar of maintainability, the present application suffers from another foundational defect. A comparison of the prayers in the previous C-482 petition and those urged herein demonstrates that the reliefs are identical, and no new circumstance has been demonstrated which would justify reopening of the matter. Entertaining a successive petition in respect of the same cause would amount to sitting in appeal over an earlier order of a coordinate Bench, which is impermissible. 8. In view of the earlier adjudication dated 23.11.2022, and in the absence of any fresh ground or subsequent event altering the legal position, this Court is of the considered view that the present application does not survive for consideration. 9. For the reasons recorded above, the present Criminal Miscellaneous Application under Section 482 CrPC is dismissed as not maintainable. It is clarified that the dismissal is confined to the maintainability of the present petition, and no observation herein shall be construed as reflecting upon the merits of the pending criminal proceedings. ( Ash ish Nait h an i, J.) 1 4 .1 1 .2 0 2 5 Nitesh/