Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:84465 Court No. - 79 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 5740 of 2024 Revisionist :- Gyan Prakash Pandey Alias Rahul Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Jai Prakash Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The present criminal revision has been filed with prayer to allow the revision and set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 02.09.2024 passed by the learned District Judge, District Prayagraj in Appeal under Section 29 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 registered as Criminal Misc. Case No.527 of 2024 (Gyan Prakash Pandey @ Rahul vs. Neha Pandey and others) by which learned Session Judge rejected the delay condonation application 6kh without considering the material which was available on record and passed in casual and mechanical manner. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case an ex-parte order was passed against the revisionist on 27.04.2019 against which he filed an appeal before the learned court of Session with an application u/s 5 Limitation Act which was decided on 28.05.2024 by which application u/s 5 Limitation Act was allowed for cost of Rs.4500/- as condition precedent for condonation of delay and 07.06.2024 was fixed for hearing on admission of appeal but due to absence of revisionist/appellant the appeal was dismissed at the admission stage for non-appearance. Again Criminal Appeal No.527 of 2024 was filed with an application u/s 5 Limitation Act which was dismissed by order dated 02.09.2024 against which the present revision has been preferred. It is also submitted that due to illness the revisionist could not make deposit of cost Rs.4500/- in time that was the reason he filed present fresh appeal with application u/s 5 Limitation Act on account of wrongful advise given by his counsel. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that the revisionist may have filed an application before the learned appellate court for recall of order dated 07.06.2024 regarding dismissal of appeal due to non-appearance. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record and the order passed by the learned appellate court, it appears that an application u/s 5 Limitation Act filed with the appeal against the order dated 27.04.2024 was allowed for cost of Rs.4500/- as pre-condition for condonation of delay but he did not deposit the amount and also became absent on the date of admission of appeal i.e. 07.06.2024 as a result appeal was dismissed for non-appearance. Again the revisionist filed fresh appeal without disclosing the aforesaid fact of allowance of application u/s 5 Limitation Act and dismissal of appeal at the stage of admission by order dated 07.06.2024 in the present appeal and application u/s 5 Limitation Act was dismissed by order dated 02.09.2024. It shows inadvertence on the part of the revisionist due to wrongful advice by the counsel, therefore, there appears no any ground to allow the present revision but revisionist is directed to move an application for recall of order dated 07.06.2024 passed by the learned appellate court within a period of 15 days that will be heard and decided by the learned court concerned in accordance with law keeping in view the aforesaid factors. Accordingly, this criminal revision is disposed of. Order Date :- 20.5.2025 Ashok Gupta Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad