Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:43297 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION DEFECTIVE No. - 365 of 2025 Revisionist :- Raj Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Sandhya Singh,Jitendra Vikram Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajnish Kumar,J. 1. Heard, Ms. Sandhya Singh, learned counsel for the revisionist and learned Additional Government Advocate. 2. This belated revision has bee filed alongwith an application for condonation of delay. The office has reported a delay of 358 days in filing the revision. 3. From perusal of the affidavit filed in support of the application, it is apparent that there is no ground for condonation of delay, what to say of sufficient ground for condonation of the delay of the aforesaid period of delay. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the revisionist submits that, on account of matrimonial dispute, the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was filed by respondent nos.2 and 3 and the suit under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, was filed by the revisionist before the Family Court. During the pendency of the said proceedings, the matter was settled between the parties and permanent alimony of rupees nine lakh was decided. Thereafter, a suit under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriages Act was filed jointly by the revisionist dated 13.09.2022. She further submits that, in view of the settlement, demand drafts of Rs. 4,00,000/- dated 01.09.2022 and Rs. 5,00,000/- dated 14.03.2023 in the name of Principal Judge, Family Court, Lucknow were deposited by the revisionist before the Family Court in the said suit. However, since respondent no.2 had not appeared, therefore, the suit under Section 13B could not be disposed of till date. In the meantime, a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. again has been filed by respondent nos.2 and 3, in which the revisionist has been summoned. On a query, she fairly submits that the revisionist has not filed any written objection or application in the proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. 5. In view of above, if the aforesaid amount has been deposited and is under deposit before the family court, the revisionist can move an appropriate application before the concerned court in the impugned proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. (Ms. Case No. 790 of 2024, Smt. Manju Devi & Another Vs. Raj Kumar) for adjustment or payment from the said amount, which may be considered by the concerned court in accordance with law. 6. In view of above, the application (Crl. Misc. Application No.01 of 2025) for condonation of delay is dismissed. 7. Consequently, the revision stands dismissed. ...................................................................(Rajnish Kumar, J.) Order Date :- 28.7.2025 Haseen U. Digitally signed by :- HASEENUDDIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench