Court No. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 931 of 1996 Revisionist :- Mohd. Rahmani Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. & Another Counsel for Revisionist :- L.P. Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.
By order dated 11.7.1996 the case was directed to be listed on 23.07.1996 for admission.
The aforesaid revision was listed after 22 years on 29.11.2018. None appeared to press the said revision and the case was passed over on that date.
On 11.12.2018 again no one appeared on behalf of the revisionist to press the said revision and the case was again passed over.
Today the list is revised and no one has appeared for the revisionist. Learned AGA is present for the State.
The present revision had been filed by the revisionist challenging the order dated 15.6.1996, passed by the Ist Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, District Banda in Case No.34/XI/96, Smt. Dilshad Fatima vs. Mohd. Rahmani rejecting the application filed by the revisionist under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C. for setting aside the exparte order dated 28.8.1995, passed in case No.62/XI/95, under Section 125 Cr.P.C.
The revisionist was married to the opposite party in accordance with Muslim Customs. It is stated that a divorce deed was written on 19.6.1994 in the presence of Abrar Hussain, Niyaj Ahmad and Akbar Subhani, who are real Mausa, cousin brother and maternal grand father of opposite party no.2. An application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was filed by the opposite party no.2 on 24.3.1995 before the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, District Banda. According to the revisionist the court below has granted an exparte maintenance @ Rs.350/- per month to the opposite party no.2.
The revisionist came to know about the said order when police of Police Station Mohabbatpur Painsa, District Allahabad came to his house for execution of recovery warrant on 11.3.1996. The revisionist immediately moved an application under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C. for setting aside the exparte order dated 28.8.1995. The said application was contested by opposite party no.2, who filed here objection on 4.4.1996. During the pendency of the said application the revisionist filed a criminal revision before this Court for setting aside the exparte order dated 28.8.1995, which was numbered as Criminal Revision No.639 of 1996. This Court by order dated 26.4.1996 directed the trial court to decide the application under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C. within a period of two months. The trial court by order dated 15.6.1996 had dismissed the application of the revisionist under section 126(2) of the Cr.P.C., hence the present revision.
I have gone through the order dated 15.06.1996 passed by the Ist Civil Judge (Junior Division), Banda, who had recorded a categorical finding that twice the registry was sent to the revisionist on the application of opposite party no. 2, which was not received back. It amounts to service upon the revisionists. It was further observed that in proceeding under Section 126 (2) Cr.P.C. an ex parte order can be set aside, if the application is made within three months and cause shown is sufficient. It is accepted fact that opposite party No.2 is the wife of the revisionist and as the application was not filed within three months for recalling the order passed under Section 125 Cr.P.C.. As such the application under Section 126 (2) Cr.P.C. was dismissed.
I find no ground to interfere in the order dated 15.06.1996 passed by the court below. As such the revision is dismissed.
Order Date :- 22.12.2018 AKJ