Court No. - 42 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8151 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ram Vilas Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 11 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Alok Kumar,Manoj Yadav,Rahul Yadav,Vinod Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Anil Kumar-X,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A for the State respondents. 2. The instant writ petition has been preferred praying for the following relief: "i. issue a writ order, or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to the competent authority/respondents, consider the application dated 20.12.2024 of the petitioner and lodge F.I.R. against the respondent no. 4 to 12." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently submits that the report submitted by the competent authority/revenue official clearly establishes that the private respondents had illegally removed the stone (Patthar Nasab). Consequently, proceedings under the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 were initiated, and an order dated 29.08.2012 was passed, directing the Station House Officer, Police Station Ghosi, District Mau, to lodge an FIR against the private respondents. Despite the said order, the petitioner made several approaches to the local police authorities; however, no FIR was registered. Subsequently, the petitioner sent an application by registered post to the Superintendent of Police, District Mau, on 20.12.2024, but no action was taken. 4. The relief is opposed by learned A.G.A. on three-fold grounds. Firstly, the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 is a self-contained Code, and if the petitioner was aggrieved, he ought to have invoked the remedy provided under the said Code. Secondly, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on the ground of inordinate delay, as the order in the revenue matter qua demarcation was passed in 2012, and no such relief can be accorded in the instant proceedings after such a long lapse of time. Thirdly, at this belated stage, no criminality can be attached. 5. Confronted with the situation, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner does not want to press the writ petition and the same may be dismissed as not pressed and leave may be accorded to institute fresh proceedings in accordance with law. 6. With the aforesaid leave, the writ petition is dismissed as not pressed. Order Date :- 28.4.2025 NLY (Anil Kumar-X,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- NAND LAL YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad