HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4134 of 2025 Court No. - 86 HON'BLE SUBHASH CHANDRA SHARMA, J. List revised none appeared for the revisionist even in the revised call. Learned counsel for the opposite party Sri Vijay Kumar Pandey as well as learned A.G.A. are present. Since this is criminal revision and cannot be dismissed in default but it is to be decided on merit. This criminal revision has been filed with a prayer to allow the present revision against the order dated 30.04.2025 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jaunpur in Criminal Application No. 140 of 2025 (Santraj Vs. Smt. Anju Yadav and Another) under Section 173(4) B.N.S.S., Police Station Kotwali, District Jaunpur. Learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. argued that in this case the revisionist is Sasur of opposite party no. 2 whose brother is opposite party no. 3. Opposite party no. 2 is married to the son of the revisionist. There is matrimonial dispute between the revisionist and opposite party no. 2 regarding which there is litigation. For making harassment of the opposite party nos. 2 and 3, present application was filed by the revisionist under Section 173 (4) of B.N.S.S. before the learned court to direct the police to lodge an F.I.R. against the opposite party nos. 2 and 3 by making false allegations in the application which was heard and decided by the learned trial court by order dated 30.04.2025 against which present revision has been filed only for the purposes of harassment of opposite party nos. 2 and 3. The learned trial court has dismissed the application on the ground of the application being false and frivolous. On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. and perusal of record, the order passed by the learned trial court dated Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Babu Ram Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Vijay Kumar Pandey Santraj Yadav .....Revisionist(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s) 30.04.2025, it transpires that there is matrimonial dispute between opposite party nos. 2 and her husband, the son of the revisionist and cases are going on between both of them. The opposite party no. 2 was married to the son of the revisionist in the year 2007 and has a son aged about 14 years. Due to dispute between both the parties present application has been filed by the revisionist against the opposite party nos. 2 and 3. The learned trial court has passed the order in question dated 30.04.2025 after considering the material on record. There appears no any illegality or impropriety in the order passed by the learned trial court dated 30.04.2025 but this revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this criminal revision is dismissed. May 14, 2026 Suraj Srivastav CRLR No. 4134 of 2025 2 (Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SURAJ SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad