Allowed

Manjit Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC9 Aug 2021A482/7800/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a notice and consequential proceedings under Section 12 of the Protection of Women against Domestic Violence Act, 2005. It modified existing orders to adjust maintenance paid under Section 125 Cr.P.C. against the higher maintenance awarded under the DV Act.

What did the court decide?

Application to quash the notice under Section 12 of the Protection of Women against Domestic Violence Act, 2005, was allowed; maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. to be adjusted against DV Act mainte

Manjit Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7800 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Manjit Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- A.G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶6

The application has been moved to quash the impugned notice dated 04.02.2021 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge, (Jr. Div) Pilibhit and all its consequential proceedings of Case No. 410 of 2012, under Section 12 of Protection of Women against Domestic Violence Act, PS.- Puranpur, District- Pilibhit.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the opposite party no. 2 is being paid maintenance allowance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. to the tune of Rs.2,000/- per month. Thereafter, the opposite party no.2 filed a suit against the applicants under Section 12 of Protection of Women against Domestic Violence Act and an amount of Rs.5000/- per month was awarded to the opposite party no.2 vide order dated 28.08.2014 by the learned A.C.J.M., Court No.2, Pilibhit.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is also paying maintenance allowance to the opposite party no.2 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. to the tune of Rs.2000/- per month. Besides complying with above orders passed under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and view of provisions of Section 12(2) of the Act the amount of maintenance allowance granted under Section 125 Cr.P.C. shall be set off against the amount payable under provisions of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. Section 12(2) of the Act reads as under:-

¶9

"Section 12 (2) The relief sought for under sub-section (1) may include a relief for issuance of an order for payment of compensation or damages without prejudice to the right of such person to institute a suit for compensation or damages for the injuries caused by the acts of domestic violence committed by the respondent:

¶10

Provided that where a decree for any amount as compensation or damages has been passed by any court in favour of the aggrieved person, the amount, if any, paid or payable in pursuance of the order made by the Magistrate under this Act shall be set off against the amount payable under such decree and the decree shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), or any other law for the time being in force, be executable for the balance amount, if any, left after such set off."

¶11

Considering all aspects of the matter, the judgment and order 18.10.2012 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2 Pilibhit passed under Section 125 Cr.P.C., P.S.-Poranpur, District Pilibhit

¶12

and order dated 28.8.2014 under Section 12 of Protection of Women against Domestic Violence Act, PS.- Puranpur, District- Pilibhit. are confirmed and modified to the effect that the maintenance allowance of Rs.2000/- per month awarded in the proceeding under Section 125 Cr.P.C. shall be adjusted/included in maintenance allowance awarded to the opposite party no.2 under the provisions of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 which is to the tune of Rs.5,000/- per month.

¶13

In the light of aforesaid, this application stands allowed.

¶14

Order Date :- 9.8.2021 Fhd.

Manjit Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manjit Singh 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

Vivek @ Chhotu (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dr. Ritu Garg Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanjay Kumar Vs State of Up and Another

Sardar Jagjot Singh Rishi @ Jagjot Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Amarpal Singh Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Deepak @ Deepu Sharma and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another