Disposed

Pankaj Kumar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC3 Mar 2020A227/1356/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge order under Article 227 CrPC addressed the petitioner's petition to installmentize maintenance arrears. The court held that the petitioner, a high-salary government servant, had no means problem. It directed payment in quarterly installments and stayed enforcement proceedings if regular payments are made.

What did the court decide?

Arrears to be paid in three quarterly installments; execution of recovery warrant stayed if regular payments are made.

Pankaj Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1356 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Pankaj Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ruhi Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard Ms. Ruhi Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

The present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed for setting aside the order dated 16.01.2020 passed and 14.01.2020 passed Principal Judge, Family Court Aligarh in Case No.60/2019 (Smt. Poonam Vs. Pankaj Kumar), under Section 128, Criminal Procedure Code, as well as set aside the ex-parte order dated 10.01.2019 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Aligarh in Case No.253/2018 (Poonam Kumari and another vs. Pankaj Kumar), under Section 125 Criminal Procedure Code, P.S. Delhigate, District Aligarh.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that maintenance petition of respondent nos. 3 and 4 has been decreed ex-parte against petitioner and his application under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C. has also been rejected by Principal Judge Family Court, Aligarh; that petitioner approached this Court through Crl. Misc. Application No.35886 of 2019 (Pankaj Kumar vs. State of U.P. and others) under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for getting the recovery of proceedings stayed but no order was passed by this Court; that petitioner moved an application before Principal Judge, Family Court, Aligarh for staying recovery of warrant but the same was rejected by Principal Judge vide order dated 14.01.2020; that as per impugned order dated 14.01.2020 arrears of around Rs.3 lacs, is due out of which Rs.50,000/- has been deposited by petitioner; that in the interest of justice installments of arrears of maintenance be made so that petitioner may comply with the order.

¶8

The learned counsel for applicant further submits that petitioner will not press his application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No.35886 of 2019.

¶9

Per contra learned A.G.A. submits that petitioner is a highly paid government servant and is posted as Assistant Professor in Chemistry Department of I.I.S.E.R, Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh and getting handsome monthly salary over Rs.1,50,000/-.

¶10

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusal of record, I do not find that petitioner, who is highly paid government servant is a person of meager means or has any problem in payment of arrears of maintenance to his wife and minor daughter.

¶11

However, considering the quantum of arrears without commenting on merits of the case, the petition is disposed of with the order that entire amount of arrears of maintenance of opposite party nos. 3 and 4 will be paid by petitioner to opposite party no. 3 Smt. Poonam Kumari or deposited in the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Aligarh in three quarterly equal installments by 7th April, 2020, 7th July, 2020 and 7th October, 2020 along with regular payment of current amount of maintenance by 7th of next month. In case of default in payment of any of the installment, the entire amount of arrears of maintenance will be recoverable through execution of recovery warrant or by adopting coercive measures by Family Court, Aligarh. If the petitioner makes regular payment of current maintenance as well as three installments as above the execution of recovery warrant shall remain stayed until the default is made by petitioner.

¶12

The petition is accordingly, disposed of .

¶13

Order Date :- 3.3.2020 Md Faisal

Pankaj Kumar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankaj Kumar v. State of U.P. and 3 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

Nisar and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Om Prakash and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Alka Agarwal and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jai Singh and 5 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Krishna Kumar Sharma Vs Aligarh Development Authority

Smt. Arti Vs State of U.P. and Another