HIGH CGURT OF JUDIGATURE CHHATT!SGARH: BILASPUR W, P. {CiNa 1482 of 2907 I J Petitioner : USha Dubey .Versu5 Respondents ' : State of Chhattisgarh and i x Poet for order . on}; kRd arch. 2007‘ i Sd/- _ " Satish K. Agnihotri @ June. 2002. The viscera was ssent for F.S.L. an 3.2.2005 by thev respondent Nc.3 to reSpondent No.5 for forenoic examination. ' . kn the Sessions Trial No. 118l2005. the First Additionai Sessions Judge acquitted the accused nameiy Teekam Prasad Dwivedi, Smt. Shanti Bai and Smt. Ratnaweii (respectively. mother and sister of Teekam Prasad Dwivedi) from the 'aiieged offences punishable under section 498-A and Sectien 304-3 of the indian penal Code vide judgment and order dated 295.20% (Annexure P 3). . Being aggrieved the petitioner tiieda Criminairevision No. 698 of 2006 in this Court. This Ceurt vide order dated 7.12.2005 (Annexure PM) dismissed the revision observing that “Undisput iy report of Forensic Science Laboratory has net been received, but fer the purpose of offence under Section 304-3 of the IPC unnatural death and seen before death cruelty on the demand of dowry are the essentiai ingredients. therefore. when unnatural death was not in dispute. the absence of report of FSL. does not adversely affect any of the parties." . The petitioner has tiled this petition under Article 2260f the Constitution 'of india. seeking a writ/direction for iudioiai review of the order dated 112.20% passed by a Division Bench of this Court in Criminai Revision No. 698/2006. . Theiurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of theConstitution of lndia has been expiained in catenaof decisions and it is well settled that no writ or a direction can be issued. tirstiv,'against a decision, passed by the High Court; seoondiv‘ against the order. which has merged with the iudgment and order passed by the High Court. in the present case. a direction to the respondent No.5 to sent viscera report of forensic examination. expeditiously. was aiready subject matter before the Sessions Judge in Sessions Triai No. 188/2005 and thereafter. before this Court m Crimina! Ravi-sign N059$f frivkeus m: has nc basis. 7, Thus, no wtit of maneiamus‘ a5 of the case. The petition and circumstances ordef as t6 cast. NO s M Mv Sdl— Judge , ‘ x A t ‘ w l \ Thakur 200$. Thus. this ayed for. can be isaued m ‘ f Satish K. Agnihotri 'tao £ p t {he faca i6 acccrdingly dismissed. a pr n 3