HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CIVIL REVISION No. - 81 of 2026 Court No. - 54 HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J. 1. Case called out. None appears for the revisionist even in revised call. Learned counsel for the respondent no.1 is present. 2. On earlier occasion, learned counsel for the revisionist had sent his illness slip on which a specific direction was made by this Court that in case learned counsel for the revisionist remains absent on the next date, appropriate orders after hearing the counsel for respondent no.1 will be passed by disposing of this revision. 3. Since today also, no one appeared for the revisionist, the matter is taken up in terms of the previous order and the learned counsel for the respondent no.1 is heard. 4. This civil revision has been filed against the judgment and order dated 22.05.2026 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Mahoba in Election Petition No.01 of 2021 (Prabhat Pathak Vs. Raju Singh @ Avnindra Singh and Others), whereby the Amendment Application dated 20.05.2026 filed by revisionist, has been rejected. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the amendment application filed by the revisionist, who happens to be the respondent no.1 in the election petition, has been dismissed by the trial court by assigning proper reasons. The facts sought to be brought on record in the written statement by means of the amendment application were not related to the actual dispute involved in the election petition. Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Gaurang Dwivedi, Prajit Chaturvedi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Arvind Kumar Srivastava, Devendra Singh Sri Raju Singh Alias Avnindra Singh .....Revisionist(s) Prabhat And 6 Other .....Opposite Party(s) 6. Heard learned counsel for respondent No. 1 and perused order dated 22.05.2026 passed by the trial court. 7. The amendment application filed on behalf of the revisionist was also considered by this Court. It appears that additional paragraphs were sought to be incorporated in paragraph 30 of the written statement, Paper No. 49-Ka/1. Perusal of the said proposed pleadings prima facie shows that the said pleadings consist of allegations which have been made against other defendant by attributing criminal antecedents to him. 8. This Court is of the view that incorporating criminal history or criminal antecedents of a candidate has no relevance to the issues which are the real dispute in an election petition. The rejection of the amendment application filed by the revisionist by the learned trial court, therefore, does not warrant any interference. 9. Accordingly, this civil revision is dismissed and order dated 22.05.2026 passed by the trial court rejecting the amendment application of the revisionist is affirmed. September 23, 2026 SK CLRE No. 81 of 2026 2 (Anil Kumar-X,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUSHEEL KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad