Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:140803 Court No. - 84 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4306 of 2025 Revisionist :- Priyanshu Rai Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Deeksha Gupta,Siddharth Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The present criminal revision has been filed with a prayer to allow the revision and set aside the judgment and order dated 15.05.2025 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Azamgarh in Case No. 153 of 2025 (Ranjana Rai Vs. Priyanshu Rai) under Section 144 BNSS/125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Devgaon, District Azamgarh. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case, an ex-parte order under Section 144 BNSS/125 Cr.P.C. was passed by the learned trial court allowing the application for maintenance and fixing the amount Rs. 3500/- per month in favour of wife vide order dated 15.05.2025. Further submitted that the order passed by the learned trial court is cryptic and has been passed without appreciating the evidence on record. The application was proceeded ex-parte regarding which he filed an application for recall of the order on 14.05.2025 but it was rejected by the learned trial court and thereafter present order was passed on 15.05.2025 finally, therefore, request to set aside the order and allow the revision. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that the revisinist has an option to move an application under Section 145(2) BNSS/126(2) Cr.P.C. to get the order recalled. On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. perusal of record and order passed by learned trial court dated 15.05.2025, it appears that the learned trial court has passed the order ex-parte, fixing the amount of maintenance Rs. 3500/- per month in favour of wife while assuming the service of notice sufficient on the revisionist. It also appears that prior to passing of final order, an application for recall of ex-parte order was moved by the revisionist which was rejected by the learned trial court and subsequently present order was passed. In this regard, there is remedy available to him under proviso to Section 126(2) Cr.P.C./145(2) BNSS which is as under: "Provided that if the Magistrate is satisfied that the person against whom an order for payment of maintenance is proposed to be made is wilfully avoiding service, or wilfully neglecting to attend the Court, the Magistrate may proceed to hear and determine the case ex parte and any order so made may be set aside for good cause shown on an application made within three months from the date thereof subject to such terms including terms as to payment of costs to the opposite party as the Magistrate may think just and proper." In the interest of natural justice, the opportunity of hearing be given to the revisionist also before passing of the final order against him and for his inadvertence reasonable cost may be imposed. In this way, it is just and proper to direct the revisionist to approach before the learned trial court and move an application under Section 145(2) BNSS/126(2) Cr.P.C. within a period of 30 days from today to recall the order dated 15.05.2025 that shall be heard and decided by the learned trial court after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties in accordance with law without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties. Accordingly, the present revision is disposed of, finally. Order Date :- 19.8.2025 Anurag Singh Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad