Allahabad High Court
Mohammad Ahmad vs State Of U.P. And Another on 2 September, 2025
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:154834
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 5739 of 2024
Mohammad Ahmad
.....Revisionist(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Revisionist(s)
:
Atul Srivastava, Mohd. Farooq
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)
:
G.A., Ghazala Bano Quadri
Court No. - 91
HON'BLE MADAN PAL SINGH, J.
1. Heard Mr. Mohd. Farooq, learned counsel for the revisionist, the learned A.G.A. for the State and Mrs. Ghazala Bano Quadri, learned counsel for opposite party no.2.
2. Learned counsel for the parties agree that the present criminal revision may be disposed of finally without calling for any further affidavit in view of the order which is being proposed to be passed today.
3. This criminal revision under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the revisionist against the judgment and order dated 15th October, 2024 passed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Fatehpur in Criminal Misc. Case No. 505 of 2023 (Mohd. Ahmad vs. Ayasha Khan) U/s 126 (2) Cr.P.C. as well as the ex-parte judgment and order passed by the dated 02nd August, 2022 passed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court in case no. 453 of 2019 (Smt. Ayasha Khan vs. Mohd Ahmad) U/s 125 Cr.P.C., P.S. Kotwali, District Fatehpur whereby the revisionist is directed to pay Rs. 10,000/- per month from the date of filing of application.
4. By the impugned judgment and order dated 15th October, 2024, the Family Court has dismissed the application U/s 126 (2) Cr.P.C. filed by the revisionist, which has been filed against the ex-parte judgment and order dated 02nd August, 2022 passed on an application filed by opposite party no.2 under Section 125 Cr.P.C., by which the trial court has allowed the said application with some directions which have been mentioned in the said judgment itself.
5. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that though the service of notice has been served upon the revisionist but due to the circumstances beyond the control of the revisionist, he could not appear before the trial court due to which the impugned ex-parte judgment and order dated 02nd August, 2022 has been passed by the trial court on an application filed by opposite party no.2 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and the same illegality has also been committed by the Family Court while dismissing the application U/s 126 (2) Cr.P.C. filed by him against the said judgment, which is in violation of principle of natural justice. He, therefore, submits that in the interest of substantial justice, he may be granted one more opportunity to have his say in the proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. so that the matter may be decided on merits. 6. On the other-hand, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and the learned A.G.A. for the State have opposed the present criminal revision but they could not dispute that the impugned judgment and order passed by the trial court is an ex-parte judgment and matter should have been decided on merits.
7. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the present criminal revision including both the impugned judgments.
8. It is not disputed between the parties that though the notice has served upon the revisionist but due to some reason he could not appear before the trial court to have his say in the proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. resultantly, the matter has been decided ex-parte.
9. It is settled law that every order passed, which results in evil civil consequence to a party, must be consistent with the rules of principles of natural justice, failing which the same would be unsustainable in the eyes of law.
10. Principles of natural justice are those rules which have been laid down by the Courts as being the minimum protection of the rights of the individual against the arbitrary procedure that may be adopted by a judicial, quasi- judicial and administrative authority while making an order affecting those rights. These rules are intended to prevent such authority from doing injustice.
11. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the revisionist should be granted one more opportunity to have his say in the proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C.
12. Consequently, the judgment and order dated 15th October, 2024 passed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Fatehpur in Criminal Misc. Case No. 505 of 2023 (Mohd. Ahmad vs. Ayasha Khan) U/s 126 (2) Cr.P.C. as well as the ex-parte judgment and order passed by the dated 02nd August, 2022 passed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court in case no. 453 of 2019 (Smt. Ayasha Khan vs. Mohd Ahmad) U/s 125 Cr.P.C., P.S. Kotwali, District Fatehpur are set aside and the ex-parte order dated 02.08.2022 is modified to the extent the revisionist shall pay Rs. 5,000/- per month to opposite party no.2 regularly in place of Rs. 10,000/- per month from the next month i.e. October 2025.
13. The revisionist is directed to deposit Rs. 1,00,000/- towards arrears of maintenance allowance awarded in favour of opposite party no.2 (out of which Rs. 50,000/- is to be deposited after two weeks from the date of this order and the remaining amount Rs.50,000/- be deposited after ten days from date of first deposite) by the court below under the impugned ex-parte judgment along with a certified copy of this order within four weeks from today. Thereafter the court below shall consider and decide the proceedings under Section 125 Cr.PC. afresh, in accordance with law, by means of a reasoned and speaking order, after affording opportunity of hearing to both the parties preferably within four months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order along with a receipt of deposit of Rs. 1,00,000/- towards arrears of maintenance allowance by the revisionist, without granting any unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties, if there is no other legal impediment.
14. It is also clarified that the total amount of arrears as deposited by the revisionist before the trial court in favour of opposite party no.2 shall be subject to final outcome of the proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C., which shall be decided afresh as directed by this Court herein above. It is further directed that the revisionist shall pay Rs. 5,000/- per month to opposite party no.2 regularly from the next month i.e. October 2025. In the event of non-compliance with this order, the relief granted shall stand vacated automatically.
15. The present criminal revision is allowed subject to the observations and directions made above.
(Madan Pal Singh,J.)
September 2, 2025
C. MANI
