Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:24929 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 464 of 2025 Revisionist :- Dilip Kumar Patwa Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And 2 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Jaikaran Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Shri Jaikaran, learned counsel for revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record. 2. By means of the present criminal revision under Section 19 (4) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 the revisionist has challenged the judgement and order dated 24.03.2025 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Raebareli in Case No. 151 of 2025 under Section 145 (2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Surkasha Sanhita, 2023 arising out of Application No. 3 Ka, under Section 5 of the Limitation Act in Case No. 121 of 2025 whereby the said court has imposed a cost of Rs.50,000/- in application 3Ka, under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for revisionist that opposite party no. 2 is the wife of revisionist and opposite party no. 3 is his son. It is further submitted that the marriage between opposite party no. 2 and the revisionist was solemnized on 07.12.2010 as per Hindu Rites & Rituals. After the marriage, opposite party no. 2 started living with the revisionist. It is alleged that certain false allegations were leveled by opposite party no. 2 with regard to demand of dowry by the revisionist and his family members due to which opposite party no. 2 was mentally and physically harassed and she left her matrimonial home and started living with her parents. 4. In the aforesaid circumstances, that she has filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and by means of order dated 15.10.2022 interim maintenance for an amount of Rs.3,000/- was ordered in favour of opposite party no. 2 and Rs.1,000/- to opposite party no. 3 per month and notices were issued to the revisionist. When the revisionist came to know about the order passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Raebareli under Section 125 Cr.P.C., moved an application under Section 125 (2) Cr.P.C. for recall of the said order stating therein that the revisionist had not received any notice from the court concerned and he had no knowledge about the pending proceedings. He has further prayed that he may be permitted to participate in the proceedings and filed the objections to the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. It is on the application of the revisionist that the impugned order dated 15.10.2022 has been passed allowing the same with cost of Rs.50,000/-. 5. Learned counsel for revisionist has submitted that the amount of cost imposed on the revisionist is excessive considering the fact that he is working as a Driver in the Fisheries Department and is earning around Rs.50,000/- per month. 6. Having gone through the record, it is noticed that interim order was passed on 15.10.2022 and till date the revisionist has a liability to pay Rs.1,75,000/- (Rs. One Lac Seventy Five Thousand only) to opposite party no. 2 and 3 out of which, the revisionist has paid around Rs.29,000/-. 7. Considering the fact that though there has been some delay in filing the application for recall but certainly the revisionist, who is the husband of opposite party no. 2 and father of opposite party no. 3, has a right to participate in the said proceedings but cost should not be excessive and prohibitive so as to preclude unnecessary party from participating in the legal process. Accordingly this Court is of the considered view that in case the revisionist is ready and willing to discharge his entire liability as ordered in the interim maintenance, he should be allowed to participate in the proceedings under Section 125 (2) Cr.P.C., deserves to be allowed with such conditions. 8. Accordingly, in case the revisionist deposits an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- within next four weeks before the trial court then he should be allowed to participate and his application under Section 126 (2) would be deemed to have been allowed. 9. In light of the above, the revision is allowed with the direction to the revisionist to deposit an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- within next four weeks before the trial court. On deposition of said amount, opposite party no. 2 and 3 shall be at liberty to move an appropriate application for withdrawal of the same. 10. It is made clear that in case the revisionist does not deposit the said amount, the benefit of this order shall not be made available to the revisionist and the application would be deemed to have been rejected. . (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 30.4.2025 Virendra Digitally signed by :- VIRENDRA KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench