Shakti Bhaskar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2025)

Shakti Bhaskar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to the revisionist to file an application under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C. for recall of the ex parte judgment and order dated 10.05.2024 before the court below within three weeks, along with a certified copy of this order, to be considered and decided on merits without any objection regarding delay; the court below to pass a reasoned and speaking order after hearing the parties, preferably within two months thereafter.

Issue for consideration

Whether the present criminal revision under Sections 397/401 Cr.P.C. is maintainable where the impugned ex parte judgment and order under Section 125 Cr.P.C. can be recalled through the statutory remedy under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C., which the revisionist has not availed.

Court's answer

The criminal revision is not maintainable and is dismissed on the ground of availability of an alternative statutory remedy, namely the recall remedy under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C. for the ex parte judgment and order, which the revisionist did not avail before approaching the revisional Court.

Ratio / Principle

If the revisionist files an application under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C. for recall of the ex parte judgment and order dated 10.05.2024 before the court below within three weeks, along with a certified copy of this order, it shall be considered and decided on merits without raising any objection regarding delay; the court below shall pass a reasoned and speaking order after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties, preferably within two months thereafter.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal revision under Sections 397/401 Cr.P.C. against an ex parte judgment and order dated 10.05.2024 of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Prayagraj, in Maintenance Case No. 972 of 2021 (Smt. Arti and Another vs. Shakti Bhaskar), allowing a Section 125 Cr.P.C. application and directing payment of Rs. 4,000/- per month to the wife and Rs. 3,000/- per month to the minor son: dismissed as not maintainable, the revisionist having approached the revisional Court without first availing the statutory remedy of recall under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C.; liberty granted to file a recall application under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C. within three weeks, to be decided on merits without objection to delay, by a reasoned and speaking order preferably within two months. (Madan Pal Singh, J.)

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2972 of 2024

Shakti Bhaskar

.....Revisionist(s)

Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Revisionist(s) :	Vijendra Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :	G.A.

Court No. - 89

HON'BLE MADAN PAL SINGH, J.

Heard Sri Vijendra Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the revisionist, as well as the learned A.G.A. for the State.

This criminal revision under Sections 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the revisionist against the ex parte judgment and order dated 10.05.2024 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Prayagraj, in Maintenance Case No. 972 of 2021 ( Smt. Arti and Another vs. Shakti Bhaskar ), under Section 125 Cr.P.C., whereby the learned Judge, while allowing the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. filed by the opposite parties, directed the revisionist to pay Rs. 4,000/- per month as maintenance to opposite party no. 2 and Rs. 3,000/- per month to the minor son, opposite party no. 3, from the date of the application. The said amount is to be deposited by the 10th day of each English calendar month.

When the matter was taken up, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and the learned A.G.A. raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the present criminal revision. They contended that the impugned judgment and order passed under Section 125 Cr.P.C. is ex parte , and the revisionist, without availing the statutory remedy provided under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C. for recall of the ex parte judgment, has directly approached this revisional Court seeking to set aside the same. It is, therefore, submitted that the present criminal revision is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed.

CRLR No. 2972 of 2024

2

4.Learned counsel for the revisionist could not dispute the aforesaid legal position. However, he prayed that some time may be granted to the revisionist to avail the statutory remedy under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C.

In view of the above, this criminal revision is dismissed on the ground of availability of an alternative statutory remedy.

However, it is provided that in case the revisionist files an application under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C. for recall of the ex parte judgment and order dated 10.05.2024 before the court below within three weeks from today, along with a certified copy of this order, the same shall be considered and decided on merits, in accordance with law, without raising any objection regarding delay, if any. The court below shall pass a reasoned and speaking order after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties, preferably within a period of two months thereafter.

(Madan Pal Singh,J.)

October 13, 2025

pks

Digitally signed by :- PANKAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad