CRLR No.222 of 2010 Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, Advocate for the revisionist. Mr. B.P. Nautiyal, Advocate for the respondent. Learned counsel for the respondent while raising a preliminary legal objection on the maintainability of the present revision, submitted that since there is a statutory remedy available to the revisionist to move an application u/s 126(2) Cr.P.C. against the ex-parte order dated 10.9.2010 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, as such this revision at the behest of the revisionist is not maintainable. On a perusal of Section 126(2) Cr.P.C, it reveals that against the ex-parte order passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, statutory provision is available, however the revisionist, instead of availing the appropriate statutory remedy, has directly approached this Court through this revision. As such, this revision is dismissed as not maintainable. (D.V.,J.) 10.11.2010 RG