JUDGMENT

R.K. Pattanaik, J. - The petitioner has approached this Court assailing the correctness of the impugned order under Annexure-1 dated 7th June, 2022 passed in CRP No.117 of 2019 by the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack on the ground that restoration of the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. dismissed for non-prosecution could not have been entertained since the court cannot recall or review its order in view of Section 362 Cr.P.C.

2. As claimed by the petitioner, opposite party No.1 wife filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. in the Family Court registered as CRP No.89 of 2015, however, since no steps were taken repeatedly, it was dismissed for default, whereafter, restoration thereof was applied through CRP No.117 of 2019 in terms of Section 126 Cr.P.C. followed by a request to condone the delay in terms of Section 5 of the Limitation Act later to which the petitioner was summoned and on his appearance, he filed an objection by claiming that a proceeding under Section 125 Cr.P.C. cannot be restored to file and the court as is not vested with any inherent power has become functus officio after passing of the final order, hence, it cannot recall or review the dis