Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:86040 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 16814 of 2025 Applicant :- Dharmendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anjani Kumar Shahwal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State. 2. This application u/s 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed with the following prayer : "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to allow this application and set aside the impugned order dated 02.09.2019, order dated 22.12.2022 passed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Court No.2, Bareilly and order dated 07.03.2025 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Bareilly in Maintenance Case No. 1245 of 2016 (Smt. Asha v. Dharmendra), under Section 125 CrPC." 3. Perusal of record shows that the opposite party no.2 was awarded maintenance by the Family Court by ex parte judgement dated 02.09.2019. The applicant has filed an application under Section 126(2) CrPC to recall the said ex parte judgement which was allowed by the Family Court vide order dated 27.09.2022 subject to costs of Rs.5,000/-. It appears that said costs of Rs.5,000/- was not deposited by the applicant and thus, by impugned order dated 22.12.2022, the Family Court observed that the order dated 02.09.2019 passed under Section 125 CrPC shall remain effective and operative. Thereafter, the applicant has filed an application on 07.03.2025 to recall the aforesaid order dated 22.12.2022, which has been rejected by impugned order dated 07.03.2025. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that after application under Section 126(2) CrPC was allowed subject to costs of Rs.5,000/- vide order dated 27.09.2022, applicant has given the amount of costs to his Advocate to deposit the same before the court but the said amount was not deposited and applicant was not aware about that fact. Referring to facts of the matter, it was submitted that the impugned orders are liable to be quashed. 5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that there is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order. 6. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record. 7. So far as the order dated 02.09.2019 is concerned, by that order, maintenance was granted by the Family Court in favour of opposite party no.2. This application under Section 528 BNSS against order dated 02.09.2019 is not maintainable. Further, against said order, the applicant has already availed remedy provided under Section 126(2) CrPC. 8. As far as order dated 07.03.2025 is concerned, it is apparent from record that there has been gross delay and laches on the part of the applicant. The ex parte judgement dated 02.09.2019 was recalled by the court concerned vide order dated 27.09.2022 subject to costs of Rs.5,000/- but the costs were not deposited. Consequently, the order dated 02.09.2019 was considered effective and operative vide order dated 22.12.2022. It appears that after three years, the applicant has filed application to recall the order dated 22.12.2022, which has been rejected vide order dated 07.03.2025. 9. After considering the entire facts, this Court does not find any material illegality or perversity in the impugned orders. There is nothing to show that there has been any abuse of the process of Court or miscarriage of justice. The application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. lacks merit and thus, liable to be dismissed. 10. Accordingly, the application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is hereby dismissed. Order Date :- 20.5.2025/ Rama Kant Digitally signed by :- RAMA KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad