Partly allowed

Aslam Parvez v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC28 May 2018CRLR/1797/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court modified an interim maintenance order reducing the allowance for one respondent while sustaining it for another, fixed arrears payment, and directed the lower court to conclude the Section 125 Cr.P.C. proceeding within six months without undue delay.

What did the court decide?

Interim maintenance reduced to Rs. 1,000/pm for one party; Rs. 1,000/pm sustained for another. Applicant to pay Rs. 6,000 arrears by 30.06.2018. Section 125 proceeding to conclude within six months.

Aslam Parvez Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 49

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1797 of 2018

¶3

Revisionist :- Aslam Parvez Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Rajendra 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 07.04.2018 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ghazipur in Criminal Misc. Case No. 576 of 2015 (Farzana Bano Vs. Mohd. Aslam) on interim maintenance application 14B, Police Station- Gahamar, District- Ghazipur, by which interim maintenance allowance @ Rs. 2,000/- per month to the opposite party no. 2 and @ Rs. 1,000/- per month to the opposite party no. 3 has been awarded by the learned court below from the date of that order i.e. 07.04.2018.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that interim maintenance allowance @ Rs. 3,000/- per month (in all) is excessive and arbitrary keeping in mind the fact that the maintenance allowance @ Rs. 1,500/- per month is already being paid to the opposite party no. 2 under an order passed Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. Learned counsel for the applicant specifically submits states that there is no default in payment of the maintenance allowance under the aforesaid Act.

¶8

It has been further submitted that the applicant is working as a pathologist in a hospital at New Delhi and he is not earning more than Rs. 10,000/- per month.

¶9

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.

¶10

Leaving it open to the opposite party no. 2 apply for recall of this order, the present revision is disposed of with the following directions:

¶11

The award of interim maintenance allowance is modified to Rs. 1,000/- per month to the opposite party no. 2 in place of Rs. 2,000/- per month and maintenance allowance to the opposite party no. 3 @ Rs. 1,000/- per month is sustained from the date

¶12

of the order.

¶13

The applicant shall continue to pay monthly maintenance allowance @ Rs. 2,000/- per month (in all) to the opposite parties from the date of the order, such that the amount of Rs. 6,000/- towards arrears of interim maintenance allowance for the period April, 2018 and June, 2018 shall be paid by the applicant to opposite parties on or before 30.06.2018 or be deposited before the learned court below within that time.

¶14

The applicant shall continue to pay to opposite parties or deposit before the learned court below, interim maintenance allowance from the period July, 2018 onwards at the aforesaid rates i.e. 2,000/- per month (in all) 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

All the amounts may be either paid to the opposite parties directly or be deposited by the applicant with the Court below within time indicated above. In the latter case the amount/s shall be released to the opposite parties, forthwith.

¶17

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.

¶18

Subject to applicant continuing to comply with the impugned order, the proceeding under Section 125 Cr.P.C. itself may be concluded as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of the production of a certified copy of this order, without allowing any undue or long adjournment.

¶19

It is further clarified that while deciding the matter of award of final maintenance allowance, the learned Court below shall shall make fair estimation as to the applicant's income on the basis of material and evidence existing on record and pass the order and provide for such maintenance as may be justified in the facts, circumstances and evidence of the case (i.e. yet to be led), without being influenced in any manner and to any extent by any observation made in this order.

¶20

Order Date :- 28.5.2018 A. Singh

Aslam Parvez v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aslam Parvez v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

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

Simirati Devi Vs Rampher

Smt. Heera @ Meena Vs State of U.P. and Another

Somnath Vs State of U.P.

Brijesh Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashok Sharma and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Dilip Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another