- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3293 WP No. 108085 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO.108085 OF 2016 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: SRI CHANDSAB S/O. IMAMASAB KILLEDAR, AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURAL COOLIE, R/O: KANAVI, TQ/DIST: GADAG. …PETITIONER (BY SRI DINESH M. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. AFREENABANU W/O. CHANDUSAB KILLEDAR, AGE: 24 YEDARS, OCC: TAILOR WORK, R/O: C/O: NASRUDDINSAB S/O: FAKRUSAB DODDAMANI. R/O: KANAVI, TQ/DIST GADAG. 2. KUMAR TANVEER AHMAD S/O. CHANDUSAB KILLEDAR, AGE: 4 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: KANAVI, TQ/DIST: GADAG. R2 MINOR REP. BY R1 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI S.S.KOLIWAD, ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2 IS MONRO REP. BY R1) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 24.08.2016 PASSED BY PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT, GADAG IN CRL.MISC.NO.75/2016 ON I.A.NO.3 AND 4 VIDE ANNEXURE -F AS NULL AND VOID AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3293 WP No. 108085 of 2016 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) The petitioner is before this Court calling in question an order dated 24.08.2016, by which, the concerned Court answering an application in Crl.Misc.No.75/2016 grants maintenance at Rs.3,000/-. 2. Heard the learned counsel Miss Vaibhavi Inamdar appearing for the petitioner. The respondent-wife though served, remains unrepresented. 3. The petitioner is the husband. The respondent is wife. The two get married on 11.05.2011. It transpires that several proceedings are initiated by the wife against the husband and the husband against the wife. The issue in the lis is not with regard to those proceedings. The wife institutes proceedings invoking Section 125 Cr.P.C. seeking maintenance from the hands of the husband. The concerned Court, by its order dated 18.06.2016, passes an ex parte order directing the petitioner to pay Rs.1,500/- to each of the respondents therein. The petitioner not - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3293 WP No. 108085 of 2016 knowing to the order, did not comply with it. This resulted in the wife instituting proceedings in Crl.Misc.121/2016 for recovery of arrears. It is then the petitioner files an application seeking recalling of the ex parte order and stay of the operation of the order, in the light of the recovery proceedings instituted. The concerned Court rejects both the applications. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court in the subject petition. 4. Learned counsel Miss. Vaibhavi Inamdar appearing for the petitioner submits that the order directing payment was ex parte. The petitioner was not aware of the said order. The proceeding comes to the knowledge of the petitioner only when, the recovery proceedings are initiated and notice was issued thereon, as obtaining under Section 125(3) of the Cr.P.C. Learned counsel would submit the order be set aside and the matter be remitted back for fresh consideration before the concerned Court. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3293 WP No. 108085 of 2016 5. A perusal at the order passed by the concerned Court, which directs payment of Rs.3,000/- as maintenance would clearly indicate that it was passed ex parte without hearing the petitioner. The submission of the learned counsel that the petitioner comes to know of the same only after institution of proceedings Section 125(3) of the Cr.P.C., also merits acceptance. Therefore, on the twin score that an ex parte order cannot be used to initiate proceedings for recovery, as it is penal in nature. The proceedings are required to be obliterate, reserving liberty to the concerned Court to answer the applications after hearing the petitioner and pass necessary orders in accordance with law. 6. For the aforesaid reasons, the following : ORDER (i) The petition is allowed. (ii) The order dated 24.08.2016 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Gadag, in Crl.Misc.No.75/2016, stands quashed. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3293 WP No. 108085 of 2016 (iii) The matter is remitted back to the hands of the concerned Court, in Crl.Misc.No.75/2016, to hear the petitioner and the respondent and then pass necessary orders in accordance with law bearing in mind the law, as obtaining today with regard to grant of maintenance to the wife from hands the husband. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE NAA/CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 125