IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.864 of 2008 ABDUL MANNAN Versus RASHIDA KHATOON ----------- 7 30/9/2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner. Prayer made by the petitioner at the out set for filing supplementary affidavit in order to wriggle out of a finding recorded in paragraph-5 of the impugned order, must be and is hereby rejected. The reason for such rejection is also plain and simple in as much as in the aforesaid paragraph no. 5, of the impugned order, the Court below has held that:- “This is the most unfortunate of this case that inspite of good knowledge and instruction, the O.P. has not participated in judicial proceeding and scope of reconciliation has flopped and lastly having left no option, the case was fixed for evidence.” Learned counsel for the petitioner would however submit that this Court should first verify the aforesaid finding of fact by calling the records from the Court below and the petitioner should thereafter be given a chance to explain the same by filing supplementary affidavit. Such examination of fact and 2 enquiry into proceedings of the Court below however is not contemplated within the limited scope of the provisions of Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure especially when there is also no such pleading in this Civil Revision Application that finding as recorded by the court below in the impugned order is based on any error of records. That apart, this Court would find that the petitioner had not adduced any evidence in course of proceeding under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. If that was the care and caution adopted by the petitioner in the court below, he may choose to thank his own stars but in any event he cannot now at the revisional stage be permitted to raise a grievance on that score as with regard to the correctness of findings of fact recorded in the impugned order. If the petitioner still feels that he was not properly represented or the order was exparte, he has a statutory remedy under section 126(2) of the Code 3 of Criminal Procedure. With the aforementioned observation this application is dismissed with a direction to the petitioner to pay the entire arrears and current amount within a period of one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, failing which the court below will be entitled to take coercive steps against the petitioner. ( Mihir Kumar Jha,J) Abhay Kumar