Disposed

Smt. Sitara v. Hasrat and Another

Allahabad HC2 Dec 2020A482/16643/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. sought to direct the Family Court to decide a long-pending Section 125 maintenance case. The court fixed a four-month deadline for the trial court to conclude the proceedings after notice to the opposite party.

What did the court decide?

Fixed a timeline of four months for the trial court to decide the pending maintenance case (Case No. 890 of 2017).

Smt. Sitara Vs Hasrat and Another — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16643 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Sitara Opposite Party :- Hasrat And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ranjeet Asthana

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Ranjeet Asthana, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been filed seeking the following relief:

¶7

"to direct the learned Apper Judge of the family court Meerut to decide the case no. 890 of 2017 (Smt. Sitara Vs. Hasarat and Others) u/s 125 Cr.P.C. in within stipulated period."

¶8

It is contended by Sri Ranjeet Asthana, learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant does not have any independent source of income and is solely dependent upon the opposite party no.3. The opposite party no.3/husband of the applicant has failed to maintain her. The applicant stands on the brink of financial destitution on account of the negligent and callous attitude of the opposite party no.3. The applicant instituted proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C for grant of maintenance. However, the proceedings have not been decided till date.

¶9

The only prayer made by Sri Ranjeet Asthana, learned counsel for the applicant is that the case may be decided within a stipulated period of time.

¶10

Learned A.G.A does not have any objection to the aforesaid prayer.

¶11

The legislative scheme for maintenance of wives, children and

¶12

parents is enacted in Chapter IX of the Cr.P.C., and is appropriately titled "Order for Maintenance of Wives, Children and Parents". The legislative scheme is comprehensive and extends from Sections 125 and 128 Cr.P.C.

¶13

The legislative intent of the said provisions is to provide expeditious financial succour to the dependent spouse, children and parents of the defaulting party. The purpose of grant of maintenance under the said provisions shall be defeated, if the said proceedings are kept pending indefinitely. Delay in deciding the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C will frustrate the legislative object of enacting the provision.

¶14

In the instant case the proceedings have been pending for an inordinately long period, without good cause.

¶15

It is imperative that the proceedings under the aforesaid provisions be decided expeditiously as per law by the competent court to realise the legislative intent and secure the ends of justice. In light of the preceding discussion this Court has to fix a time frame for deciding the proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C.

¶16

The matter is remitted to the learned trial court / the Principal Judge, Family Court, Meerut to execute the following directions:

¶17

I. The learned trial court / Apper Judge of the family court Meerut to decide the case no. 890 of 2017 (Smt. Sitara Vs. Hasarat and Others) u/s 125 Cr.P.C., pending before Appar Judge, Family Court, Meerut within a period of four months from the date of production of a computer generated copy of this order, downloaded from the official website of the High Court Allahabad.

¶18

The computer generated copy of such order be self attested by the petitioners (party concerned) along with a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked. The Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶19

II. An opportunity of hearing shall be given to the opposite party no.3.

¶20

III. The opposite party no.3 shall cooperate with the proceedings before the learned trial court / the Apper Judge, Family Court, Meerut.

¶21

IV. The learned trial court if necessary shall proceed on a day to day basis to ensure that the proceedings are decided within the above mentioned timeline.

¶22

The application is disposed of finally.

¶23

Order Date :- 2.12.2020 Nadeem Ahmad

Smt. Sitara v. Hasrat and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Sitara v. Hasrat 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

Kanhaiya Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Javed and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Suresh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jitendra @ Jitendra Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sugreev Vs State of U.P. and Another

Prashant Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and Another