( 1 ) IN these two writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioners have sought for quashing the ex-parte orders of interim maintenance passed by the Additional principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore. The petitioners have not yet filed their objections and sought for re-consideration of the ex-parte orders of interim maintenance granted in the petitions for maintenance filed under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

( 2 ) THE Contention of the petitioners is that neither Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'cr. P. C. ') contains any provision enabling the Court to pass an ex-parte order of interim maintenance nor there is any other provision in the Cr. P. C. to re-consider the order of maintenance once passed whether interim or final; that the jurisdiction exercised by the Family court is the one exercisablc by the Court of Judicial magistrate I Class under Section 125 of the cr. P. C. ; therefore, the restrictions and the limitations imposed on the jurisdiction of the Criminal court continue to govern the Family Court while exercising jurisdiction under Section 125 Cr. P. C. Therefore, it is submitted that th