JUDGMENT Vipin Sanghi, CJ. - The present petition has been preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to seek the following reliefs:- 'a. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quashing the order & judgment dated 14.11.2018 passed by the learned Court of Judicial Magistrate 2nd, Haldwani in Criminal Complaint No. 119 of 2016, Kunwar Nripendra Singh Rautela-versus-Ramesh Chandra Pandey & Another, whereby the said learned Court clandestinely overlooked the evidence collected under section 244 Cr.P.C. and disposed of the said case behind the back of the petitioner prior to the date fixed. b. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quashing the orders & judgment dated 04.01.2019 passed by the learned Court of Sessions Judge, Nainital in Criminal Appeal no.-Nill of 2018, Kunwar Nripendra Singh Rautela-versus-State of Uttarakhand & others, whereby the said learned Court unjustly passed the impugned order and disposed of the matter. c. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction for administering justice to the petitioner against the respondents no.-02 & 03. d. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing all the Courts to suo-moto take strict action against all lawbreakers offending dignity of The Advocates inside a Court's premises.' 2. Pertinently against the judgment dated 14.11.2018 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, II, Haldwani in Criminal Complaint No. 119 of 2016, preferred by the petitioner, the petitioner had preferred a statutory appeal under Section 378 Cr.P.C. before the Court of District and Sessions Judge, Nainital being Criminal Appeal No. 119 of 2018. The said Appeal was taken-up for consideration by the learned District and Sessions Judge on 04.01.2019, on which date, the petitioner, unconditionally, withdrew the said Appeal. 3. Since the petitioner has withdrawn the Appeal against the judgment dated 14.11.2018, it is not open to the petitioner to prefer the present petition to assail the same judgment. Consequently, reliefs 'a' and 'b' sought in this petition are misconceived. So far as the reliefs 'c' and 'd' are concerned, they are completely vague. 4. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.