Dismissed¶17

Padumnath v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC25 May 2026CRLRD/208/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: Section 173(4) BNS application; Chief Judicial Magistrate Gonda; Misc. Case No. 2709 of 2025; Tehsildar Sadar Gonda; mutation order; proposed accused; criminal revision defective; CRLRD No. 208 of 2026; maintainability objection by A.G.A.; competent authority acting judiciary not liable under criminal law; abuse of process of law; withdrawal of revision; dismissed as withdrawn; 25 days delay; stamp reporting section; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; Court No. 27; Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, J.; decided May 25, 2026; counsel Kapil Dev Srivastava and Deepak Kumar for revisionist, G.A. for opposite parties.

What did the court decide?

Leave to withdraw the revision; revision dismissed as withdrawn ¶17

Padumnath vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL REVISION DEFECTIVE No. - 208 of 2026

Padumnath

.....Revisionist(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. And 3 Others	Home Deptt. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Revisionist(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Kapil Dev Srivastava, Deepak Kumar : G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 27

¶8

HON'BLE RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA, J.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶10

The instant criminal defective revision has been preferred against the impugned order dated 12/1/2026 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Gonda in Misc. Case No. 2709 of 2025, whereby the application filed by the revisionist under Section 173(4) BNS has been allowed in respect of opposite parties no.3 and 4 and the application in respect of opposite party no.2, the proposed accused, Tehsildar Sadar Gonda has been rejected.

¶11

As per the report of stamp reporting section the revision is delayed by 25 days.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. , at the outset, submits that the instant criminal revision is not maintainable, as the application filed under Section 173(4) BNS by the revisionist has been allowed in respect of private parties against whom the main grievance of the revisionist lies. Opposite party no.2 who is impleaded as Tehsildar Sardar Gonda, has passed a mutation order with which the revisionist is aggrieved, but only on account of passing the same wrong order, a competent authority acting judiciary cannot be held liable under criminal law. The present revision is, in fact, an abuse of the process of law.

¶13

Learned counsel for the revisionist, after arguing at some length, sought

¶14

CRLRD No. 208 of 2026

¶15

¶16

leave of the court to withdraw the present revision.

¶17

Accordingly, present revision is dismissed as withdrawn .

¶18

(Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.)

¶19