IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.596 of 2009 SANTOSH KUMAR GUPTA, S/O- JAWAHAR LAL SAH, R/O- VILLAGE- KOIRIA TOLA, RAXAUL WARD NO. 5, P.S.- RAXAUL, DISTRICT- EAST CHAMPARAN. Versus 1. PINKI DEVI , W/O- SANTOSH KUMAR GUPTA. 2. KAJAL KUMAR, D/O- SANTOSH KUMAR GUPTA. 3. RAJA BABU, SON OF SANTOSH KUMAR GUPTA. BOTH ARE THE MINORS AND THEY ARE UNDER THE GUARDIANSHIP OF PINKI DEVI ALL RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE- KOIRIA TOLA, RAXAUL, WARD NO. 5, P.S.- RAXAUL, DISTRICT- EAST CHAMPARAN PRESENTLY RESIDING AT THE HOUSE OF HER FATHER SHIV SHANKAR SAH, R/O- VILLAGE- RAM NAGAR, P.S.- SIWAIPATTI, DISTRICT- MUZAFFARPUR. For the petitioner : Mr. Vijay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Matloob Rab, APP ----------- 6 08.04.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties. While assailing the order impugned, it is contended that the order impugned has been passed directing payment of maintenance to wife and two minor children without service of valid notice. Paragraph 3 of the order impugned records as under: “3. In spite of the receipt of two separate registered notice sent to the O.P. and his father the O.P. did not appear or filed any show cause. The case has been heard exparte.” If the petitioner raises the said grievance then the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short “the Code”) itself provides a remedy in terms of proviso to Section 126 of the Code. Petitioner has to invoke the said remedy. Learned counsel submits that he would be filing appropriate application in the Court below itself. Having considered the said submissions, this 2 Court disposes of this application by the following order: Let the petitioner approach the Court below within four weeks by filing appropriate application for setting aside the ex-parte order along with a copy of the present order. If any such application is filed in the manner stated above, learned Court below shall consider and dispose of the same on merit in accordance with law. pkj ( Kishore K. Mandal, J)