Alok Kumar @ Alok Bajpai vs Smt. Sonam Devi

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL REVISION DEFECTIVE No. - 473 of 2025

¶3

Alok Kumar @ Alok Bajpai

¶4

.....Revisionist(s)

¶5

	Versus
Smt. Sonam Devi	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Revisionist(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Dr. Pooja Singh, Achleshwar Raj, Anshuman Singh :

¶6

Court No. - 11

¶7

HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J.

¶8

Heard Shri Achleshwar Raj, Shri Anshuman Singh and Dr. Pooja Singh learned counsels for the revisionist and learned AGA for the State of U.P. as well as perused the record.

¶9

The instant revision has been preferred alongwith an application (Crl. Misc. Application No. 2 of 2025) seeking condonation of delay of about 943 days challenging the order dated 11.11.2022 passed by First Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Hardoi (in short "Family Court") in Criminal Case No. 366 of 2018 (Smt. Sonam Devi Vs. Alok Kumar), under Section 125 Cr.P.C.. The operative portion of the order dated 29.05.2017 reads as under:-

¶10

" याची श्रीमती सोनम देवी की ओर से प्रस्तुत यािचका अन्तगर्त धारा-125 दण्ड प्रिक्रया संिहता एकपक्षीय रूप से स्वीकार की जाती है। िवपक्षी आलोक कुमार को आदेिशत िकया जाता है िक वह प्रत्येक माह की दस तारीख तक याची श्रीमती सोनम देवी को मु०-2,500/- रूपये प्रितमाह की दर से भरण-पोषण अदा करना सुिनिश्चत करे। उक्त भरण-पोषण की धनरािश यािचका प्रस्तुत करने के िदनांक से देय होगा।"

¶11

To condone the delay of about 943 days, following averments have been made in the affidavit filed in support of the application seeking condonation of delay:-

¶12

"3. That there is an apparent delay of 943 days in filing the present revision so far as it relates to the order dated 11.11.2022. The said delay occurred for bona fide reasons which are neither deliberate nor intentional, as explained hereunder.

¶13

4. That the Revisionist had no knowledge of the ex parte order 11.11.2022 until receipt of registered notice on 27.01.2023. Immediately thereafter, within limitation, he moved an application under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C. before the Learned Family Court for recall of the ex parte order.

¶14

5. That the said recall application remained pending before the Learned Family Court from January 2023 till 23.07.2025, and the Revisionist was diligently pursuing the said remedy before the court of first instance.

¶15

CRLRD No. 473 of 2025

¶16

2

¶17

6. That during the pendency of the recall proceedings, the Revisionist was precluded from approaching this Hon'ble Court, since the matter was sub-judice before the Family Court and the outcome of the recall application directly impacted the maintainability of any revision.

¶18

7. That the delay in challenging the order dated 11.11.2022 is, therefore, wholly attributable to the pendency of the recall proceedings, and not on account of any negligence or inaction on part of the Revisionist.

¶19

8. That the law is well settled that while considering an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, a liberal approach is to be adopted where sufficient cause preventing timely filing is demonstrated, and matters should ordinarily be decided on merits rather than being thrown out on technical grounds of limitation"

¶20

To the view of this Court, the aforesaid averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the application seeking condonation of delay are completely misconceived. Thus, the application (Crl. Misc. Application No. 2 of 2025) seeking condonation of delay in filing the instant revision is accordingly rejected. Consequently, the instant revision is also dismissed.

¶21

September 17, 2025 Mohit Singh/-

¶22

(Saurabh Lavania,J.)

¶23

Digitally signed by :- MOHIT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Alok Kumar @ Alok Bajpai v. Smt. Sonam Devi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alok Kumar @ Alok Bajpai v. Smt. Sonam Devi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Shoeb Ahmad vs Shri Om Prakash Soni, Tax Superintendent Nagar Nigam Zone 2 Aishbagh Lko.

Saurabh Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Central Bureau of Investigation / Anti Corruption Branch Lko. Thru. I.O. vs Vimal Kumar Bhargava

Smt. Haripriya Tripathi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Janardan Krishna Yadav @ Janardan Prasad vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

Alok Kumar @ Alok Bajpai Vs Smt. Sonam Devi