Partly allowed

Amit Kumar Dubey (Assistant Loco Pilot) v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 May 2018CRLR/1640/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal revision under Section 125 Cr.P.C., the High Court set aside the Family Judge's order rejecting an application for cross-examination due to neglect. The Court ordered the applicant to pay interim maintenance and costs to the respondent-wife and directed the lower court to expeditiously decide the case.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; interim maintenance of Rs. 5,000/month and costs of Rs. 15,000 directed to be paid.

Amit Kumar Dubey (Assistant Loco Pilot) Vs State… — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 49

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1640 of 2018

¶3

Revisionist :- Amit Kumar Dubey (Assistant Loco Pilot) Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Mahesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶6

The present criminal revision has been filed against the order dated 02.05.2018 passed by the learned Family Judge/Addl. District & Sessions Judge (F.T.C.), Court No. 2, Jhansi in Case No. 26 of 2015 (Smt. Richa Vs. Amit), under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station- Barua Sagar, District- Jhansi, whereby the learned Court below has rejected the application filed by the applicant under Section 311 Cr.P.C.

¶7

It is submitted that the applicant is presently pre-occupied in attending to his mother who is suffering from cancer and has taken to be Bombay on a regular basis. In such circumstances, it has been submitted that the applicant could not appear on certain dates that resulted in the order being passed denying the applicant opportunity to cross-examine the applicant.

¶8

Learned AGA on the other hand submits that the applicant has constantly neglected to appear in the proceedings and that earlier also a similar order under Section 311 Cr.P.C. had been passed on 30.05.2017 which was recalled on the similar application filed by the applicant.

¶9

It is thus submitted that the applicant is neglecting to appear in the proceedings, therefore, the learned Court below has not erred in rejecting the application filed by the applicant.

¶10

It is also submitted that no amount of interim maintenance allowance is being paid to the opposite party no. 2, while the proceedings have remained pending since 2015.

¶11

Considering the above, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the revision pending or issuing notice to the opposite party no. 2, in view of the order proposed to be passed, keeping in mind the interest of opposite party no. 2.

¶12

Leaving it open to the opposite party no. 2 apply for recall of this order, the present revision is disposed of . The order dated 02.05.2018 is set aside, subject to payment of cost Rs. 15,000/-

¶13

which shall be paid to the opposite party no. 2 on or before 31.05.2018.

¶14

Also, in view of the fact that 125 proceedings have remained pending since 2015, the applicant shall further pay to the opposite party no. 2 @ Rs. 5,000/- per month by way of interim maintenance from the period June, 2018 onwards. The said amount may either be paid to the opposite party no. 2 or be deposited before the learned Court below on or before the tenth day of each calendar month.

¶15

Subject to aforesaid compliance being made, no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicant.

¶16

However, it is made clear that in the event of failure on part of the applicant to comply with any part of the order, coercive measures be revived from that stage without any further reference to this Court.

¶17

Subject to the applicant continuing to comply with the aforesaid order, the learned Court below shall proceed to decide the proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. as expeditiously as possible, without granting any unnecessary or long adjournments to either of the parties, preferably within a period of six month.

¶18

Order Date :- 18.5.2018 A. Singh

Amit Kumar Dubey (Assistant Loco Pilot) v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Kumar Dubey (Assistant Loco Pilot) v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kamal Akhtar and Another Vs State of Up and Another

Narayan Das and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Srikrishna Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Nanhey Khan Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Ram Badai Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Lavi @ Lalit Vs State of U.P.