Disposed

Abdul Mannan v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC13 Jul 2022A482/6643/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was filed to quash a recovery warrant from a maintenance case. The court did not decide on merits but directed the applicant to approach the Family Court to register grievances regarding non-payment and recovery taken action.

What did the court decide?

Single line: Directed the applicant to move an application before the Principal Judge, Family Court, stating his grievance, within one month.

Abdul Mannan Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2022) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 87

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6643 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Abdul Mannan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Prakash Chaturvedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Om Prakash Tripathi,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed to quash the recovery warrant (R.W) dated 08.03.2021, passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Siddharth Nagar, in Criminal Case No. 46 of 2018, (Tajibunnisha @ Jatibunnisha vs. Abdul Manna), under Section 128 Cr.P.C, arising out of order dated 18.02.2017 passed in Case No. 150 of 2008 (New Number 19 of 2016), under Section 125 Cr.P.C., P.S. Kapilvastu, District Siddharth Nagar.

¶7

It is submitted that on 18.12.2017 i.e. the date of passing of the order of maintenance, applicant has not given a single penny to his wife Smt. Tajibunnisha @ Jatibunnisha and her daughter Km. Sadma Khatoon, even as maintenance Rs. 3,000/- per month to opposite party no. 2 and Rs. 2,000/- per month to opposite party no. 3, has been awarded by Principal Judge, Family Court, Siddharth Nagar. It is submitted that applicant had performed marriage of Km. Sadma Khatoon and she is residing on her matrimonial home. It is further submitted that there is recovery of Rs. 5,35,000/- against the applicant.

¶8

Main submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that after marriage of his daughter, he is not liable to pay maintenance against her.

¶9

This application is disposed of with a direction that the applicant may move an application stating therein his grievance, before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Siddharth Nagar, within a period of one month.

¶10

Order Date :- 13.7.2022 v.k.updh.

¶11

Digitally signed by VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY Date: 2022.07.16 16:12:49 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Abdul Mannan v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Mannan 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Narendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Yogendra Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

M/S. D. Pauls Capital Limited and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Sub Inspector Adil Rashid Khan (the Then S.O. Nanora) Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ajay Kumar Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. and Another