Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:110352 Court No. - 84 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3462 of 2025 Revisionist :- Umesh Vidyarthi Opposite Party :- Madhubala And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Satyarth Agarwal,Siddharth Agrawal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case, an affidavit was filed by the opposite party no. 2 before the learned trial court with wrong details and after filing the affidavit before the learned trial court some alterations were made in it without permission. Later on she filed subsequent affidavit by making endorsement on the previous affidavit that she did not want to press the affidavit. Consequently, the learned trial court rejected the previous affidavit on the ground of not pressed and taken on record the second affidavit. In this way the learned trial court has without taking cognizance of forgery of opposite party no. 2 accepted the subsequent affidavit, which is illegal, therefore, request to allow the revision and set aside the order dated 09.05.2025. 3. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of aforesaid and contended that when previous affidavit was not pressed by the learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, then it was rejected as not pressed. Subsequent affidavit containing the correct details was taken on record by the learned trial court. In this way, there is no illegality in the order dated 09.05.2024. 4. On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties as well as learned A.G.A, perusal of record and the order passed by learned trial court dated 09.05.2025, it appears that first affidavit in compliance of the judgment "Rajnesh Vs. Neha"'s case was filed by the opposite party no. 2 before the learned trial court, in which some details were altered but this affidavit was not pressed by the learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2. The taking on record the subsequent affidavit containing the correct details cannot be said illegal or erroneous. If there is any forgery committed by the opposite party no. 2, the revisionist have an option to move an application under Section 340 Cr.P.C. before the learned trial court who will decide the application in accordance with law. 5. Thus, in considered opinion of this court, there appears no any illegality or impropriety in the order but this revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed. 6. The present criminal revision is dismissed. Order Date :- 10.7.2025 Aiman Digitally signed by :- AIMAN FAROOQUI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad