ANKUR BHARDWAJ Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. By moving the present application under section 482 Cr.P.C., the order of the Judge, Family Court, Meerut is under challenge, whereby the court has restored the application of the opposite party No. 2 under section 125 Cr.P.C. and has proceeded further.

(2.) IT has been argued that the proceeding under section 125 Cr.P.C. once dismissed in default cannot be restored as no provisions for the same has been incorporated in Chapter IX of Cr.P.C. and thus, the criminal courts are debarred from recalling/modifying their final order including the order for dismissing the application in default. Reliance has been placed on the case laws of Bhagwati vs. Ram Sewak, : ACRR -1984 -0 -315 and in the case of Shyamta vs. Dangra, ACRR -1980 -0 -3.

(3.) THE order in question has been passed by the Judge, Family Court. Section 10 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 provides for the procedure to be adopted before this Court. Sub Section (1) of Section 10 provides that the Provisions of Code of Civil Procedure 1908(5 of 1908) shall apply to the suits and proceedings other than the proceedings under Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973(2 of 1974) before a Family Court.