HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL REVISION DEFECTIVE No. - 494 of 2025 Court No. - 11 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned AGA for the State of U.P. as well as perused the record. 2. The instant revision has been preferred seeking following main relief(s):- "Wherefore The humble Revisionist, above named, most respectfully begs to submit that for the fact, reason and circumstances as stated in the accompanying affidavit, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the order dated 10/03/2017 passed by Learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Sitapur, in case no 1120 of 2014 "Rampati Versus Yadunath" after summoning the lower courts record, in the interest of law and justice. It is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may direct to opposite party on 3 for give appropriate maintenance to the revisionist in the interest of Justice." 3. The instant revision has been preferred alongwith an application (Crl. Misc. Application No. 1 of 2025) seeking condonation of delay of about 2310 days challenging the impugned order dated 10.03.2017 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Sitapur (in short "Family Court"). 4. To condone the huge delay of about 2310 days, following averments have been made in the affidavit filed in support of the application seeking condonation of delay:- "3. That the revisionist is an illiterate poor lady, hence she has no knowledge about the law. 4. That the revisionist is poor and old lady and she is suffering from hardship of money and she is unable to survive her life because she has no means of earning of money and she have no source of income. 5. That after getting the impugned order after some times when the revisionist knows Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Rakesh Kumar Nayak, Akhilendra Kumar Goswami Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Smt. Rampati .....Revisionist(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Sectt. Lko. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s) that she can approach to upper Court she approaches to many persons but she didn't get the correct information. 6. That after some times the Covid pandemic started and the revisionist get the information that every thing closed. 7. That after some time she got the information that she should approach to Hon'ble High Court then she started to arrange the money to approach to High Court. 8. That after that when this fact comes in the knowledge of revisionist that the petitioner may approached to this Hon'ble Court then she arranged some money and approached to Hon'ble high and filed the present revision." 5. To the view of this Court, the aforesaid averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the application seeking condonation of delay are completely misconceived. Thus, the application (Crl. Misc. Application No. 1 of 2025) seeking condonation of delay in filing the instant revision is accordingly rejected. Consequently, the instant revision is dismissed. September 26, 2025 Arun/- CRLRD No. 494 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Lavania,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR GANGWAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench