HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2564 of 2024 Court No. - 93 HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J. 1. It is 2:30 p.m. list has been revised. In the forenoon the case called out both the parties were present and the parties made joint request for case be taken up by 2:00'Clock after lunch. However, none present on behalf of either of the parties, hence the revision is taken up on the basis of available record. 2. The revisionist herein has challenged the order dated 06.03.2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, (Rape and POCSO Act), Court No. 2, Fatehpur, by which the re-examination of revisionist has been rejected by the Special Judge, POSCO Act/A.S.J., Court No. 4, Fatehpur. 3. It can be seen from the record that initially the revisionist was in consensual relationship with the opposite party no. 2 for quite long time and a settlement was arrived between the parties, that the revisionist dose not intend to pursue the litigation. However, the trial court did not accede the request of the revisionist on the ground that the sections involved in the case crime are 376 and 504 IPC and Section 4 POSCO Act and therefore, it is out of the purview of the Special Judge, POSCO Act/A.S.J., Court No. 4, Fatehpur to compound the case in terms of Section 320 IPC and therefore, the said request was declined on the ground of the offence being non- compoundable. Thus, as a matter of record, it can be seen from the order dated 06.03.2023 that the examination-in-chief of the revisionist was recorded on 02.11.2015 and cross-examination of the revisionist was completed on 17.02.2016. Hence the evidence of the revisionist was completed on 17.02.2016 i.e. about 9 years back. The present revision has Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Atul Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Rishab Agrawal, G.A. Rinki .....Revisionist(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) been field in February 2024, and the said application before the Additional Sessions Judge, (Rape and POCSO Act), Court No. 2, Fatehpur was decided on 06.03.2023. 4. Learned AGA has submitted that about 9 years have gone, the time of evidence of revisionist was recorded and was completed. The revisionist after a substantial period of time has filed an application for re-examination of herself, but no cogent or plausible grounds have been raised in the present revision and the period of about 9 years is unexplained, that there is an inordinate delay is taken the matter to legal course for re-examination of the witness, by the present revisionist herein. Learned AGA has further submitted that if, such applications are permitted to be allowed, there would be no end to the litigations, as such every case has to come to an end, and therefore, the litigation can not be continued at the whims of a particular witness, as and when the witness, who intends to examine or re-examine herself. 5. It appears that the present revision devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed. 6. However, it shall remain open to the revisionist to pursue the litigation and to participate in the trial by adducing appropriate evidence, if any left, and take the matter to its legal course. 7. Accordingly, the present revisions is dismissed. September 10, 2025 Vikram CRLR No. 2564 of 2024 2 (Harvir Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad