Kashi Nath Pandey, J. - (1.) THIS revision has been filed by Madan Upadhaya son of Ram Naresh Upadhaya, Smt. Saroj Upadhaya wife of Madan Upadhaya, Ram Naresh Upadhaya son late Lekh Raj Upadhaya, Smt. Mukhiya wife of Ram Naresh Upadhaya, Km. Rina daughter of Ram Naresh Upadhaya and Manoj Kumar Upadhaya son of Ram Naresh Upadhaya against the judgment and order dated 9.8.2010, passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Ballia in Criminal Revision No. 146 of 2008, Anjani Kumar Tiwari alias Lallan v. Madan and Ors. under Section 494/109 Indian Penal Code, 1860.
(2.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record. Revision No. 146 of 2008 was filed against the order dated 18.3.2008 in criminal case No. 1774 of 2007, Kripa Shankar v. Madan and Ors. under Section 494/109 Indian Penal Code, 1860.
(3.) IT is to be noted that a complaint was filed by Kripa Shankar Tiwari on account of the second marriage by Madan accused, whose first wife, the daughter of Kripa Shankar Tiwari is alive. The complaint was filed under Section 198(1)(C) Cr. P.C. Kripa Shankar Tiwari died on 28.11.1991. Then Lallan @ Anjani Kumar Tiwari son of late Kripa Shankar Tiwari moved an application for permission of the court to prosecute the complaint, which was allowed by the court's order dated 4.1.1992. Vide order dated 28.9.2006, the evidence of the complainant was closed and for further proceeding 2.11.2006 was fixed. It means the case was not disposed of finally in absence of complainant's evidence, even it was not dismissed in absence of the complainant, but 2.11.2006 was fixed for further proceeding. Vide order dated 18.3.2008, the application dated 2.11.2006 moved by Anjani Kumar Tiwari from the side of the complainant for recall of the order dated 28.9.2006 and giving opportunity to the complainant for evidence was rejected on the ground that No. order passed by the criminal court can be recalled in any provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure He has referred Section 362 Code of Criminal Procedure Even on this date the case was not finally disposed of. 22.5.2008 was fixed for further orders. Against this order in Revision No. 146 of 2008 the order dated 18.3.2008 passed by the Judicial Magistrate was quashed and the case was remanded to the Magistrate to reconsider the application dated 2.11.2006 moved by the complainant after hearing the parties. Against this order the present revision had been moved.;