The inherent power of the Court to restore a case when justice demands, and the preventive nature of the jurisdiction conferred by Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

( 1 ) HEARD learned counsel for the revisionist Sri Bhola Nath Yadav. Sri R. R. K. Mishra, learned AGA and Sri Ravinder Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 1 and have gone through the record.

( 2 ) THIS revision has been preferred against the order dated 12-4-2001 passed by learned Judge Family Court. Allahabad, in Case No. 120 of 1999, Smt. Kusum Devi v. Ram Chandra Maurya, by which the application for maintenance med by Smt. Kusum Devi against her husband Ram Chandra Maurya was dismissed.

( 3 ) IT is not disputed that Criminal Case No. 120 of 1999, Smt. Kusum Devi v. Ram Chandra Maurya was pending in the court of Judge Family Court. Allahabad, on 12/4/2001 between the parties when the impugned order was passed. The impugned order was Case called out repeatedly. None of the parties is present. The applicant was absented since 08/1, therefore. The Criminal Case No. 120 of 1999 is dismissed. T

( 4 ) THERE is an affidavit of Smt. Kusum Devi, the applicant - revisionist that she is wife of Ram Chandra Maurya. Her case of maintenance was pending before the learned Judge Family court Allahabad on 12/4/2001. Objection was med by the opposite party. On 8/1/2001 Advocates were on strike, therefore, 12/4/2001 was fixed for disposal. On 12/4/2001 Smt. Kusum Devi was present in the court, which was over crowded. When the case was not called out till 3 PM she inquired from the reader of the Family Court. Allahabad and she was told that her case was called out and it was dismissed in default. She at once moved an application for setting aside the order dated 12/4/2001 but the application was not entertained by the learned Judge Family Court on the ground that restoration application is not maintainable under Code of Criminal Procedure 1973. A true copy of the application moved by Smt. Kusum Devi before the Judge Family Court is annexed as Annexure No. 3. Since the relief was not granted by the Judge Family Court, therefore, she had no option but to me this revision before this Court.

( 5 ) A primary objection was raised that when the case was dismissed restoration application was to be moved before the Judge Family Court and instant revision is not maintainable.

( 6 ) THE learned counsel for the revisionist has cited Smt. Savitri v. Govind Singh Rawat, in which it has been held by Honble the Apex Court that jurisdiction of the Magistrate under Section IX of the Code is not strictly a criminal jurisdiction. While passing an order under that Chapter asking a person to pay maintenance to his wife, children or parent, as the case may be, the Magistrate is not imposing any fine on such person for a crime committed by him. Chapter IX of the Code contains summary remedy for securing some reasonable sum by way of maintenance subject to a decree, if any, which may be made in a civil Court in a given case provide the Personal Law applicable to the person concerned authorizes the enforcement of any such right to maintenance. The Code, however, provides a quick remedy to protect the applicant against starvation and to tide over immediate difficulties.

( 7 ) ANOTHER ruling cited by the learned counsel for the revisionist is Smt. Kamla Devi and others v. Mehima Singh in which it has been held by the Honble High Court of Punjab and Haryana that if an application under Section 125 Cr. P. C. is dismissed in default. Magistrate can pass an order of restoration on sufficient cause being shown. The observation made by Hontble the Supreme Court in the Case of Sri Bhagwan Dutt v. Smt. Kamla Devi was relied on in which it was held that: These provisions (Sections 488. 489 and 490 of the old Code of Criminal Procedure) are intended to fulfil a social purpose. Their object is to compel a man to perform the moral obligation, which he owes to society in respect of his wife and children. By providing a simple speedy and limited relief, they seek to ensure that the neglected wife and children are not left beggared and destituted on the scra