Aitya Kumar Pal v. Sandeep Kumar Pal

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The revisionist has pressed the application for condonation of delay in filing criminal revision.

3. Cause shown in the affidavit filed in support of application for condonation of delay is sufficient. The delay is bonafide and not inadvertent, therefore the same is liable to be condoned.

4. In this regard learned AGA for the State as well as learned private counsel has no objection.

5. Accordingly the instant application is allowed and delay in filing criminal revision is hereby condoned. Order on Memo of Revision.

1. Heard Shri Raj Karan Singh on behalf of the revisionist as well as Shri Vinay Kumar Verma on behalf of opposite party no.2 and learned AGA for the State.

2. The present revision has been preferred against the order dated 17.10.2023 passed by Additional Principal Judge -IInd, Family Court, Barabanki in Crl. Misc. Case No. 1089 of 2022, Aitya Kumar Pal Vs. Sandeep Kumar Pal.

3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that revisionist was married to Smt. Roli Pal on 27.4.2015 and after marriage they are living together. It is soon thereafter matrimonial dispute erected between them and accordingly an application under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act was filed by the revisionist on 30.11.2019. The wife of the revisionist filed maintenance case i.e. Criminal Misc. Case No. 1148 of 2019 on 22.10.2021 under Section 125 Cr.P.C., where by means of impugned order dated 12.01.2022 an exparte order for Rs. 5000/- was passed in favour of wife of the revisionist. Subsequently it is stated that the wife of the revisionist has lodged First Information Report under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC at Police Station Dariyabad, District Barabanki. While assailing the order dated 12.01.2022 the revisionist has not source of income and consequently he is not in a position to pay the said amount as directed by the Family Court and therefore assailed the validity of the said order before this Court in the present revision.

4. A counter affidavit has been filed by the private opposite party. From the said counter affidavit it transpires that against the exparte order dated 12.01.2022 the revisionist has moved an application under Section 126(2) of the Cr.P.C. stating that he was not served with the notice and consequently could not participate in the proceedings and therefore made a prayer for setting aside the exparte order and further stated that fresh order may be passed after giving opportunity of hearing.

5. The trial court after considering the submissions made on behalf of the revisionist as well as private opposite party by means of order dated 23.12.2022 allowed the application under Section 126(2) of the Cr.P.C. while imposing the caste of Rs. 60,000/-. It seems that the revisionist did not pay the amount of Rs. 60,000/- and consequently by order dated 27.12.2023 his application was rejected.

6. It has further been stated that the revisionist in the aforesaid circumstances again approached the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Barabanki and moved an application under Section 127 of the Cr.P.C. for modification of the award, which application was filed on 8.1.2025.

7. It is vehemently urged on behalf of the respondent that none of the aforesaid facts was disclosed by the revisionist in the present revision. He has concealed the fact that he has moved an application under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C., which was allowed on 23.12.2022 while imposing the cost of Rs. 60,000/- and the revisionist did not deposit the said amount and consequently the said application stood rejected by order dated 27.2.2023. Further all the issues which have been taken by the revisionist in the petition are already pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court in the application under Section 127 of the Cr.P.C. and in the aforesaid circumstances prayed for rejection of the present petition.

8. Learned counsel for the revisionist does not dispute the aforesaid fact and submits that in any way of the matter all the grievance raised by the revisionist is now pending before the proceedings filed in the fresh application under Section 127 of the Cr.P.C.

9. I have heard private respondent and specifically from the facts it is stated in the counter affidavit it is abundantly clear that the revisionist did not disclose about the filing of application under Section 126(2) of the Cr.P.C. and the same was allowed on 23.12.2022 while imposing the cost of Rs. 60,000/- against the revisionist. It seems that the revisionist does not deposit the amount of cost and accordingly the application was rejected on 27.2.2023 and presently the application under Section 127 of the Cr.P.C. is pending consideration.

10. In the aforesaid circumstances, I find that there is a deliberate concealment by the revisionist by not disclosing the aforesaid fact in the present revision. Any person does not come with clean hand is not entitled to any equitable remedy.

11. In the aforesaid circumstances, it has further been informed that it is on the request of the revisionist the matter was referred to Mediation Centre and interim protection was granted to the revisionist during the pendency of the mediation proceedings. No agreement could be arrived in the mediation.

12. In the light of the above, I considered the fact that the revisionist has not approached this Court with clean hand and therefore I decline to interfere in the order impugned in the present revision.

13. Apart from the above, I find that the grievance of the revisionist has already been raised in an application filed under Section 127 of the Cr.P.C. which is pending before the Family Court and accordingly for this reason also I do not find any ground to interfere.

14. I considered the fact that the revisionist has approached this Court while concealing the order passed by the Family Court, the revision is dismissed at the cost of Rs. 30,000/- which shall be deposited with the trial court within the next three weeks and the same shall be released in favour of the wife of the revisionist. (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 7.5.2025/Muk

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The revisionist has pressed the application for condonation of delay in filing criminal revision.

3. Cause shown in the affidavit filed in support of application for condonation of delay is sufficient. The delay is bonafide and not inadvertent, therefore the same is liable to be condoned.

4. In this regard learned AGA for the State as well as learned private counsel has no objection.

5. Accordingly the instant application is allowed and delay in filing criminal revision is hereby condoned. Order on Memo of Revision.

1. Heard Shri Raj Karan Singh on behalf of the revisionist as well as Shri Vinay Kumar Verma on behalf of opposite party no.2 and learned AGA for the State.

2. The present revision has been preferred against the order dated 17.10.2023 passed by Additional Principal Judge -IInd, Family Court, Barabanki in Crl. Misc. Case No. 1089 of 2022, Aitya Kumar Pal Vs. Sandeep Kumar Pal.

3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that revisionist was married to Smt. Roli Pal on 27.4.2015 and after marriage they are living together. It is soon thereafter matrimonial dispute erected between them and accordingly an application under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act was filed by the revisionist on 30.11.2019. The wife of the revisionist filed maintenance case i.e. Criminal Misc. Case No. 1148 of 2019 on 22.10.2021 under Section 125 Cr.P.C., where by means of impugned order dated 12.01.2022 an exparte order for Rs. 5000/- was passed in favour of wife of the revisionist. Subsequently it is stated that the wife of the revisionist has lodged First Information Report under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC at Police Station Dariyabad, District Barabanki. While assailing the order dated 12.01.2022 the revisionist has not source of income and consequently he is not in a position to pay the said amount as directed by the Family Court and therefore assailed the validity of the said order before this Court in the present revision.

4. A counter affidavit has been filed by the private opposite party. From the said counter affidavit it transpires that against the exparte order dated 12.01.2022 the revisionist has moved an application under Section 126(2) of the Cr.P.C. stating that he was not served with the notice and consequently could not participate in the proceedings and therefore made a prayer for setting aside the exparte order and further stated that fresh order may be passed after giving opportunity of hearing.

5. The trial court after considering the submissions made on behalf of the revisionist as well as private opposite party by means of order dated 23.12.2022 allowed the application under Section 126(2) of the Cr.P.C. while imposing the caste of Rs. 60,000/-. It seems that the revisionist did not pay the amount of Rs. 60,000/- and consequently by order dated 27.12.2023 his application was rejected.

6. It has further been stated that the revisionist in the aforesaid circumstances again approached the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Barabanki and moved an application under Section 127 of the Cr.P.C. for modification of the award, which application was filed on 8.1.2025.

7. It is vehemently urged on behalf of the respondent that none of the aforesaid facts was disclosed by the revisionist in the present revision. He has concealed the fact that he has moved an application under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C., which was allowed on 23.12.2022 while imposing the cost of Rs. 60,000/- and the revisionist did not deposit the said amount and consequently the said application stood rejected by order dated 27.2.2023. Further all the issues which have been taken by the revisionist in the petition are already pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court in the application under Section 127 of the Cr.P.C. and in the aforesaid circumstances prayed for rejection of the present petition.

8. Learned counsel for the revisionist does not dispute the aforesaid fact and submits that in any way of the matter all the grievance raised by the revisionist is now pending before the proceedings filed in the fresh application under Section 127 of the Cr.P.C.

9. I have heard private respondent and specifically from the facts it is stated in the counter affidavit it is abundantly clear that the revisionist did not disclose about the filing of application under Section 126(2) of the Cr.P.C. and the same was allowed on 23.12.2022 while imposing the cost of Rs. 60,000/- against the revisionist. It seems that the revisionist does not deposit the amount of cost and accordingly the application was rejected on 27.2.2023 and presently the application under Section 127 of the Cr.P.C. is pending consideration.

10. In the aforesaid circumstances, I find that there is a deliberate concealment by the revisionist by not disclosing the aforesaid fact in the present revision. Any person does not come with clean hand is not entitled to any equitable remedy.

11. In the aforesaid circumstances, it has further been informed that it is on the request of the revisionist the matter was referred to Mediation Centre and interim protection was granted to the revisionist during the pendency of the mediation proceedings. No agreement could be arrived in the mediation.

12. In the light of the above, I considered the fact that the revisionist has not approached this Court with clean hand and therefore I decline to interfere in the order impugned in the present revision.

13. Apart from the above, I find that the grievance of the revisionist has already been raised in an application filed under Section 127 of the Cr.P.C. which is pending before the Family Court and accordingly for this reason also I do not find any ground to interfere.

14. I considered the fact that the revisionist has approached this Court while concealing the order passed by the Family Court, the revision is dismissed at the cost of Rs. 30,000/- which shall be deposited with the trial court within the next three weeks and the same shall be released in favour of the wife of the revisionist. (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 7.5.2025/Muk