HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4707 of 2026 Court No. - 86 HON'BLE PRAVEEN KUMAR GIRI, J. 1. Heard Sri Amresh Bahadur Tiwari, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Chandra Bhushan Tiwari, learned counsel for opposite party No.2, and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that the present criminal revision has been filed seeking relief as mentioned in the prayer clause. The prayer clause is delineated below:- " It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to allow the present criminal revision and set aside the ex-parte impugned judgement and order dated 13/07/2026 passed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Court, no.4, Prayagraj in maintenance case no. 1147/2023 (Swati Singh vs. Vimal Bahadur Singh), Passed under section 144 B.N.S.S., 2023 Police station Jhunsi, District Prayagraj, whereby Rs.10,000 has been awarded maintenance to be paid to the opposite party no.2 from the revisionist each month. It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to stay the effect and operation of the ex-parte Impugned judgement and order dated 13/07/2026 passed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Court no.4, Prayagraj in maintenance case no. 1147/2023 (Swati Singh vs. Vimal Bahadur Singh), Passed under section 144 B.N.S.S., 2023 Police station Jhunsi, District Prayagraj, whereby Rs.10,000 has been awarded maintenance to be paid to the opposite party no.2 from the revisionist each month." 3. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that the present criminal revision has been preferred against the ex parte order of maintenance dated 13.07.2026 passed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Court, no.4, Prayagraj in maintenance case no. 1147/2023 (Swati Singh vs. Vimal Bahadur Singh), awarding maintenance of Rs. 10,000 /- to be paid by the revisionist to the opposite party No.2. It is submitted that the amount of maintenance is exorbitant and is not commensurate with the income of the Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Amresh Bahadur Tiwari, Vikas Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Chandra Bhushan Tiwari, G.A. Vimal Bahadur Singh .....Revisionist(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) revisionist. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. submits that an efficacious statutory remedy is available to the revisionist under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C./Section 145(2) B.N.S.S. by filing an application before the learned trial court for recalling the ex parte order. It is, therefore, submitted that the present revision is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed on the ground of availability of an alternative statutory remedy. 5. Learned A.G.A. further submits that this Court has already considered this issue in its order dated 30.03.2026 passed in Criminal Revision Defective No. 141 of 2026 (Anup Kumar vs. Smt. Pratibha Kushwaha). He further submits that a coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Revision No. 2099 of 2026 (Abhishek Gond Vs. State of U.P. and others) vide order dated 01.04.2026 has also held that against an ex parte order passed in proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C., the appropriate remedy available to the revisionist is to move an application under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C. seeking recall of the said order before the court concerned. 6. In view of the aforesaid submissions, learned counsel for the revisionist seeks permission to withdraw the present revision with liberty to avail the remedy available under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C./Section 145(2) B.N.S.S. by moving an appropriate application before the learned trial court for recall of the ex parte order. 7. Accordingly, the present criminal revision is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the revisionist to move an appropriate application under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C./Section 145(2) B.N.S.S. before the competent court for recall of the ex parte order. September 11, 2026 SFH (Praveen Kumar Giri,J.) CRLR No. 4707 of 2026 2 Digitally signed by :- SYED FAHIM HUSAIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad