Vikash Tiwari vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Vikash Tiwari vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Procedural order (not a final adjudication of the revision): interim order granted in favour of the revisionist Vikash Tiwari is vacated following his side's non-appearance; the Family Court concerned is left free to proceed against the revisionist for recovering the amount in terms of the challenged order dated 15.07.2025; personal appearance of opposite party No.2 Sadhna is dispensed with (she to engage an Advocate); matter to be listed in the second week of November, 2025; State's affidavit taken on record.

Issue for consideration

Whether the interim order granted in favour of the revisionist should be extended or vacated, given that no one appeared on behalf of the revisionist notwithstanding the Court's earlier direction of 13.08.2025. +1 more

Court's answer

Since no one appeared on behalf of the revisionist and the Court's order dated 13.08.2025 stipulated that the interim order would be extended only after hearing learned counsel for the revisionist, the interim order granted in favour of the revisionist is hereby vacated.

Ratio / Principle

With the interim protection vacated, it is open for the Family Court concerned to proceed against the revisionist for the purposes of recovering the amount in terms of the order dated 15.07.2025, which is under challenge.

Key takeaways

Personal appearance of opposite party No.2-Sadhna, D/o Sri Ved Prakash Tiwari is dispensed with, and she is directed to engage an Advocate to represent her case.ratio¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 879 of 2025, Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania, J., October 6, 2025: In a criminal revision by Vikash Tiwari against the State of U.P. and Sadhna (O.P. No.2, D/o Sri Ved Prakash Tiwari) challenging an order dated 15.07.2025 of the Family Court concerning recovery of an amount, the Court found that no one appeared on behalf of the revisionist when the case was called out in the revised list. Recalling its own observation in the order dated 13.08.2025 that the interim order would be extended on the next listing date only after hearing learned counsel for the revisionist, the Court vacated the interim order earlier granted in favour of the revisionist, declared it open for the Family Court concerned to proceed against the revisionist for recovering the amount in terms of the challenged order dated 15.07.2025, dispensed with the personal appearance of O.P. No.2 while directing her to engage an Advocate, took the State's affidavit on record, and listed the matter for the second week of November, 2025. O.P. No.2 had been produced before the Court by police personnel of P.S.-Munshiganj, District-Amethi (Ms. Vandana Yadav, Constable, and Mr. Bipin Bihari Singh, S.I.).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 879 of 2025

Vikash Tiwari

.....Revisionist(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Revisionist(s)	:	Amit Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	:	G.A.
Court No.- 11

HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J.

The affidavit filed by the State is taken on record.

Case called out in the revised list.

No one appeared on behalf of revisionist. However, the opposite party No.2-Sadhna, D/o Sri Ved Prakash Tiwari as well as learned counsel for the State are present before this Court.

The opposite party No.2-Sadhna, D/o Sri Ved Prakash Tiwari has been brought before this Court by Ms. Vandana Yadav, Constable, P.S.-Munshiganj, District-Amethi alongwith Mr. Bipin Bihari Singh, S.I., P.S.-Munshiganj, District-Amethi.

Taking note of aforesaid as also observation made by this Court in the order dated 13.08.2025, which is to the effect that "It is made clear that on the next date of listing interim order would be extended only after hearing of learned counsel for the revisionist.", interim order granted by this Court in favour of revisionist is hereby vacated.

Let the matter be listed in the second week of November, 2025.

It is open for the Family Court concerned to proceed against the revisionist for the purposes of recovering the amount in terms of order dated 15.07.2025, under challenged.

Personal appearance of opposite party No.2-Sadhna, D/o Sri Ved Prakash Tiwari, who would engage an Advocate for representing her case, is hereby dispensed with.

October 6, 2025

Vinay/-

(Saurabh Lavania,J.)

Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench