Patna High Court
Md. Mansur Alam @ Md. MansurversusAjmeri Begum
- Decided
- Disposal
- WITHDRAWN
Holding
An order under Section 125 CrPC is a quasi‑final order, permitting a criminal revision; consequently, the miscellaneous appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.
Summary
The husband (appellant) filed a miscellaneous application under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 challenging an order dated 16‑10‑2025 that granted the wife (respondent) relief under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Relying on a Full Bench decision in Dr. Dilip Kumar Sharma v. State of Bihar, the appellant argued that an order under Section 125 is not merely interlocutory but a quasi‑final order, making a criminal revision the appropriate remedy. He therefore sought to withdraw the appeal and obtain liberty to file a criminal revision. The Patna High Court accepted this submission, dismissed the miscellaneous appeal as withdrawn, and granted the appellant permission to file a criminal revision against the impugned order. The court also directed the return of the vakalatnama and a certified copy of the order to the appellant’s counsel.
Issues considered
- Whether an order passed under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code is an interlocutory order or a quasi‑final/intermediate order for the purpose of criminal revision.
- Whether the appellant may withdraw the miscellaneous appeal and instead pursue a criminal revision.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 125, 128
- Family Courts Act, 1984 — s. 19(1)
Subjects
- Family Courts Act
- Section 125 CrPC
- Criminal revision
- Quasi‑final order
- Miscellaneous appeal
- Withdrawal of appeal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Appeal No.1054 of 2025
======================================================
Md. Mansur Alam @ Md. Mansur S/o Nyamuddin Miya R/o Vill.- Barun,
P.O. and P.S.- Surajpura, District- Rohtas, Bihar.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
Ajmeri Begum W/o Md. Mansur Alam R/o Vill.- Barun, P.O.- Surajpura,
Surajpura, District- Rohtas, Bihar.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Kr. Pandey
For the Respondent/s : Mr.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR SINGH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR SINGH )
2 10-03-2026 1. The instant Miscellaneous Application under Section
19(1) of the Family Court’s Act 1984 has been preferred by the
appellant (husband) against the order dated 16.10.2025,
whereby application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. of
respondent (wife) has been allowed.
2. On the matter being taken up, at the outset, learned
counsel for the appellant submits that the Full Bench of this
Court in the case of Dr. Dilip Kumar Sharma @ Dilip Sharma
Vs. The State of Bihar and Ors. [2024 SCC OnLine Pat
8236 : 2025 (1) BLJ 1] has held that the order passed under
Section 125 of the Cr. P.C. is not an ‘interlocutory order’, but an
‘intermediate / quasi final order’, hence remedy of criminal
revision would be available qua both the interim and final order
Patna High Court MA No.1054 of 2025(2) dt.10-03-2026
2/2
under Section 125 to 128 of the Cr. P.C.
3. He further submits that in the light of the aforesaid Full
Bench judgment, the appellant does not want to press this
Miscellaneous Appeal, therefore he may be allowed to withdraw
this Miscellaneous Appeal with liberty to file criminal revision
against the order dated 16.10.2025.
4. In view of the above, the instant Miscellaneous Appeal
is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the appellant to file
criminal revision.
5. Office is directed to return the Vakalatnama and
certified copy of impugned order dated 16.10.2025 to the
learned counsel for the appellant within three days after
retaining the xerox copy of the same on record.
(Sanjay Kumar Singh , J)
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
Saif/-
U
Checking your session…