JUDGMENT :

ABDUL SHAHID, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Ranu Tiwari, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and the learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. Under challenge is the impugned order dated 19.01.2026 passed by the Judicial Magistrate-Third, Gorakhpur in Case No.132791 of 2021 (State Vs. Satish Sudarshan Gupta and Others) arising out of Case Crime No.55 of 2021 under Sections 498-A, 323, 354, 504, 406 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Gorakhpur.

3. Learned counsel for the revisionist has argued that the impugned order dated 19.01.2026 passed by the Judicial Magistrate-III, Gorakhpur is wholly arbitrary, unsustainable in law, and has been passed without due application of judicial mind and, therefore, is liable to be set aside. He further submits that the learned trial court committed a patent error of law in allowing the application moved under Section 233(2) of the B.N.S.S. without taking into consideration the material fact that opposite party no. 2 did not approach the court with clean hands while filing the application dated 14.08.2025 under Section 233(2) B.N.S.S.

4. It is next submitted that the