This Court stayed an execution order issuing recovery warrant under the Domestic Violence Act pending disposal of the applicant's pending appeal regarding maintenance award.
Impugned recovery warrant order dated 07.12.2019 shall remain in abeyance until disposal of the pending appeal.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 43
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10601 of 2020
Applicant :- Udaivir Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- A.K. Mishra,Sati Shanker Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the order dated 07.12.2019 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Mathura in Case No. 1761 of 2019 (Smt. Kusum Vs. Udaiveer), under Section 12 of Domestic Violence Act, P.S. Highway, Mathura, by which the learned Magistrate has issued recovery warrant against the applicant for Rs.1,25,000/pursuant to the application moved by opposite party no.2 dated 26.11.2019, while the appeal preferred by the applicant is pending before learned Sessions Judge, Mathura against the exparte original order dated 03.06.2019 passed in Case No. 2227 of 2019 (Smt. Kusum Singh Vs. Udaivir and others) in which the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division) FTC, Mathura had awarded maintenance of Rs. 10,000/- to the opposite party no.2 and Rs. 5,000/- to her child.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that against the order dated 03.06.2019 passed in Original Case No. 2227 of 2019 (Smt. Kusum Vs. Udaiveer and others), under Section 12 of Domestic Violence Act, P.S. Highway, District Mathura, the applicant preferred an appeal in which appellate court refused to pass any ex-parte interim order. In the meantime opposite party moved an application for recovery of the amount passed in the order, on which the impugned order has been passed by allowing the application and recovery warrant has been issued for the amount of Rs.1,25,000/-. He further submits that in compliance of order dated 11.06.2014 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Mathura modified by this Court in Application U/S 482 No. 30186 of 2018 (Udaivir Singh Vs. State of U.P. And 2 others) vide order dated 31.08.2018, he is depositing the maintenance amount of Rs.7,000/- regularly. He further submits that his appeal against the original order passed in Case No.2227 of 2019 is still pending.
Learned A.G.A. opposes the application and submits that the case under Domestic Violence Act was instituted in the year
2019 and in passing the impugned order no illegality has been committed by the court.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, no interim order being passed in appeal and applicant is depositing maintenance amount in compliance of order of this Court in Application U/S 482 No. 30186 of 2018 (Udaivir Singh Vs. State of U.P. And 2 others), it will be appropriate to direct the appellate court to pass an order in the appeal filed by the the applicant either interim or dispose of the appeal itself by providing an opportunity of hearing to the parties.
Till then impugned order dated 07.12.2019 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Mathura in Case No. 1761 of 2019 (Smt. Kusum Vs. Udaiveer), under Section 12 of Domestic Violence Act, P.S. Highway, Mathura shall remain in abeyance.
Accordingly, the application is disposed of.
Order Date :- 16.6.2020 MAA/-
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Udaivir Singh Vs. State of U.P. And 2 othersExplained¶7
Udaivir Singh Vs. State of U.P. And 2 others, Application U/S 482 No. 30186 of 2018
Udaivir Singh
State of U.P.
Ali Zamin
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
