[2025:RJ-JP:15764] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1050/2019 Sachin S/o Shri Ramsingh R/o 21 Gayatri Kunj Gatebund Colony Kalindi Vihar Agra (Up) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp 2. Smt. Kalpana Sharma W/o Sachin D/o Late Mahendrapal Sharma, R/o House No 4 P 23 Vigyan Nagar Kota 3. Parul Sharma D/o Sachin, Minor Through Its Natural Guardian Her Mother Smt. Kalpana Sharma ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. T.L. Pandey For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pawan Sharma Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Judgment / Order 08/04/2025 1. Aggrieved from order dated 27.03.2019 in misc. case No. 128/2019 passed by learned Judge, Family Court No.2, Kota, instant revision petition is preferred by petitioner-husband. 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that an ex-parte order was passed against the petitioner and petitioner is ready and willing to participate in the proceedings in case ex-parte order is set aside and an opportunity of hearing is granted to the petitioner. He further submits that the reasons assigned by petitioner is bona fide and petitioner undertakes to participate in the proceedings instituted by non-petitioner to claim maintenance. [2025:RJ-JP:15764] (2 of 3) [CRLR-1050/2019] 3. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned counsel for respondent-wife and he submits that till date this petitioner has not deposited any penny awarded by the learned Trial Court. He also submits that respondent-wife is taking care of her minor daughter and she is dependent upon her relatives. He also submits that the petitioner has not made compliance of the order of Trial Court, so he is not entitled to any relief. He submits that on three occasions ex-parte order was set aside but this petitioner again remained absent and now the Court has observed that this is a deliberate act, so he is not entitled for any leniency. 4. A perusal of material indicate that for the first time an ex- parte order was passed on 11.05.2016 and same was set aside and second time ex-parte order was passed and application was filed and same was set aside. Again an ex-parte order was passed against the petitioner and the Trial Court has allowed the application to set aside the ex-parte order for third time. The application to set aside ex-parte was dismissed when it was fourth attempt. 5. Aforesaid details clearly indicate that 4 times the ex-parte proceedings were ordered against the petitioner and out of aforesaid 4 proceedings 3 times, same were set aside but last one (4th one) was dismissed. The details also reveals that the petitioner has neither deposited any amount determined by Trial Court as maintenance before learned Trial Court nor paid any money to the respondent-(wife). 6. The petitioner has failed to show his bona fides, as sufficient opportunities were already granted to him but now this is not a time to continue to adopt lenient approach. Looking to conduct of [2025:RJ-JP:15764] (3 of 3) [CRLR-1050/2019] the present petitioner, the Trial Court has rightly dismissed the 4th application of setting aside ex-parte order and there is no ground interfere in the order passed by the Family Court. 7. The Trial Court after considering evidence, both documentary and oral has passed an order to award maintenance in favor of wife and minor daughter. There is no ground of interference in the order passed by the Family Court. 8. In view of aforesaid instant revision petition preferred by Sachin S/o Shri Ramsingh is hereby dismissed along with pending application(s), if any. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J MONU /78