Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:11609 Court No. - 81 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 463 of 2024 Revisionist :- Smt Sumitra Devi Opposite Party :- State Of Up And 4 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Piyush Patel,Pradeep Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manjive Shukla,J. 1. Heard Sri Pradeep Kumar VI, learned counsel appearing for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State. 2. The instant revision has been filed challenging therein, the order dated 21.12.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Maharajganj in Complaint Case No.83 of 2023 (Sumitra Devi Vs. Bharat Giri and others) whereby, in exercise of power under Section 203 Cr.P.C, the complaint case filed by the revisionist had been rejected. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the revisionist has argued that the revisionist, in the complaint filed before the trial court and her statement recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C., had categorically stated that Opposite Parties No.2 to 5 abused her by taking name of her caste and beaten her but inspite of that the trial court had rejected the complaint case in exercise of its power under Section 203 Cr.P.C. 4. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the revisionist and the statement of the revisionist recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. For ready reference, the statement recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. is extracted as under:- " पररिववाददिननी कवा बयवान अन्तररत धवारिवा 200 दिदं०्ቚ०सदं० सवाकनी नवाम ससुदमतवा दिदेवनी उ्቞ करिनीब 41 वरर पत्ननी दशिवशिदंकरि धधोबनी दनववासनी लखखिमवा थरूआदं थवानवा कधोतववालनी खजिलवा महरिवाजिरदंजि नदे सशिपथ बयवान दकयवा दक मदेरिनी रिदंजिनवा सदे दिधो सवाल सदे रिदंखजिशि चलनी आ रिहनी हहै। ददिनवादंक 19.05.2023 कधो शिवाम छछः बजिदे भरित नदे मदेरिदे सवाथ झरडवा दकयवा। मम अपनदे बरिवामदिदे मम चवावल दबन रिहनी थनी। तब भरित नदे मदेरिदे चवावल छीምट ददियदे। जिब मम दचलवायनी तधो वहवादं परि सज्जिवादि व शिहैमसुदቐኌशिवा, श्यवामदबहवारिनी औरि कवाफफी लधोर आ रयदे। मम भवार रयनी थनी औरि अपनदे घरि मम दछप रयनी, इसखलयदे वदे मवारि नहीም पवायवा। मसुझदे जिवान सदे मवारिनदे कफी धमकफी ददियवा औरि झझूठदे मसुकदिमम मम फदं सवानदे कफी धमकफी ददियवा। भरित कदे सवाथ रिदंजिनवा, रिमवाशिदंकरि व पझूजिवा भनी थदे। मदेरिदे धधोबनी जिवादत कदे हधोनदे कदे नवाम मदेरिदे चवावल छीምट ददियदे। इतननी हनी मदेरिनी दशिकवायत हहै।" 5. A careful perusal of the statement of the revisionist recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. demonstrates that neither she had stated that Opposite Parties No.2 to 5 abused the revisionist using the name of her caste nor in any manner she was beaten by Opposite Parties No.2 to 5. The facts and circumstances of the case categorically reveal that the complaint case filed by the revisionist had been rightly rejected by the trial court, as no offence is made out against Opposite Parties No.2 to 5. 6. In view of the aforesaid reasons, this revision lacks merit and is hereby dismissed. Order Date :- 23.1.2025 SFH Digitally signed by :- SYED FAHIM HUSAIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad