Court No. - 83

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4768 of 2021

Applicant :- Harender Sharma

Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Rana

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Santosh Kumar

Upadhyay,Vinod Kumar Upadhyay

Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

1. Heard Mr. Amit Rana, learned counsel for applicant, learned

A.G.A. for State and Mr. Santosh Kumar Upadhyay, learned

counsel representing opposite party-2.

2. At the very outset, learned counsel for applicant contends that

due to inadvertance Km. Payal, who was applicant no.2 in

proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. has not been impleaded

as opposite party-3 in present application. He therefore submits

that permission be granted to amend the cause title of present

application by seeking impleadment of Km. Payal as opposite

party no.3 in present application.

3. Prayer made for is bonafide. Accordingly same is allowed.

4. Let, necessary amendment in cause title of present

application be carried by learned counsel for applicant during

course of the day.

5. This Application under Section 482 has been filed

challenging order dated 21.11.2020 passed by Additional

Principal Judge, Family Court No.2 Meerut in Criminal Misc.

Case No. 279 of 2019 (Harendra Sharma Vs. Renu Sharma)

whereby delay condonation application under Section 5 of

Indian Limitation Act, seeking condonation of delay in filing

restoration application dated 20.12.2019 in terms of Section 126

(2) Cr.P.C. seeking recall of order dated 19.02.2019 passed in

Case No 35 of 2019 (old No. 313 of 2017) (Smt. Renu Sharma

and another Vs. Harendra Sharma) under Section 125 Cr.P.C.,

P.S. Agauta, District-Meerut has been rejected.

6. Present application came up for admission on 12.03.2021 and

this Court passed following order:

" Heard Mr. Hari Om Mishra, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Amit

Rana, learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for State.

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging

order dated 21.11.2020 passed by Additional Principal Judge, Family

Court, Court No.2, Meerut, whereby delay condonation application

under Section 5 of Limitation Act has been rejected.

It transpires from record that an order dated 19.09.2019 under Section

125 Cr.P.C. was passed against applicant and therefore applicant filed a

recall application dated 20.12.2019 seeking recall of order dated

19.09.2019 passed under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Such recall application

was filed beyond the period of limitation. Accordingly, application under

Section 5 of Limitation Act was also filed. This delay condonation

application has been rejected by court below by means of order dated

21.11.2020.

Notice on behalf of opposite party no.1 has been accepted by learned

A.G.A.

Issue notice to opposite party no.2.

All the opposite parties may filed their respective counter affidavits on or

before 07.04.2021.

Put up this case as fresh on 08.04.2021."

7. In compliance of above order dated 12.03.2021, notice was

issued to opposite party-2. She is now represented by Mr.

Santosh Kumar Upadhdyay, Advocate.

8. Counsel for the parties submit that issue involved in present

application can be decided on the basis of material already on

record. Therefore, no counter affidavit on behalf of opposite

party-1, State or on behalf of contesting opposite party-2 is

necessary. Opposite party no.3 is a minor and represented by

represented by opposite party-2. Consequently, with the consent

of counsel for parties, present application is being disposed of

finally at the admission stage without calling for a counter

affidavit.

9. Record shows that opposite party-2, Smt. Renu Sharma

initiated proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. which came to

be registered as Case No. 313 of 2017 (Smt. Renu Sharma and

another Vs, Harendra Sharma) P.S. Agauta, District-Meerut .

Subsequently, aforesaid case was re-numbered as Case No. 35

of 2019 (Smt. Renu Sharma Vs. |@ Reena Sharma an