Disposed

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

Allahabad HC23 Feb 2022CRLR/316/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of the criminal revision filed against an ex-parte interim maintenance order. It held that the petitioner had an alternative remedy as an application to set aside the order was pending below and directed the lower court to dispose of it expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

The criminal revision was disposed of with a direction to the lower court to decide the pending application to set aside the maintenance order expeditiously within two months.

Dharam Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 90 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 316 of 2022 Revisionist :- Dharam Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Kapil Tyagi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Sadhna Rani (Thakur),J.

¶2

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶3

This criminal revision has been filed by the revisionist with a prayer to quash the order dated 24.12.2021 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court District Gautam Budh Nagar in Misc. Case No.264 of 2020 (Jeetraj Vs. Dharam Singh) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., P.S. Badalpur, District Gautam Budh Nagar.

¶4

It is argued by the learned counsel for the revisionist that on 21.12.2021 in the absence of the revisionist the lower court ordered to proceed with the hearing of the interim maintenance application ex-parte and on the same date application 14-kha was heard ex-parte and the date 24.12.2021 was fixed for orders. On 24.12.2021, the impugned order was passed and an amount of Rs. 30,000/- per month was awarded as interim maintenance to the opposite party no.2. It is also argued that on the same date (after lunch), the revisionist moved an application before the lower court to set aside the order dated 21.12.2021, which is still pending so the relief is claimed.

¶5

From perusal of the file, it is clear that the proceedings before the lower court were of section 125 Cr.P.C. wherein an application for interim maintenance was moved by the opposite party no.2 on 21.12.2021. The order-sheet appended at pages-'68' & '69' of the paper book reveals that on 21.12.2021 only in the presence of counsel for the opposite party no.2 the order was made to proceed ex-parte with the application for interim maintenance and it was heard ex-parte and the date 24.12.2021 was fixed for orders. On 24.12.2021, the order of awarding Rs. 30,000/- per month was passed ex-parte. It is also clear from the record that on the same day (after lunch) the counsel for the revisionist moved an application to set aside the order dated 21.12.2021 alongwith the objections against the application 14-kha. The copy of the same was provided to the counsel for the opposite party no.2 on the same day in the court itself and as the resolution of condolence was passed by bar so the said application was fixed for 21.01.2022 for disposal.

¶6

Learned counsel for the revisionist has placed before the Court

¶7

the copy of the resolution of the Bar, Gautam Budh Naga dated 21.12.2021. According to which, due to elections of the Bar the advocates were unable to attend the courts so the resolution was passed by the bar and the courts were requested not to pass any adverse order in the absence of any of the parties. It is pointed out that even after this resolution of "no adverse order", the order dated 21.12.2021 was passed and the application for interim maintenance, which was pending since last one year was heard ex-parte in the absence of the counsel for the present revisionist and the date 24.12.2021 was fixed for orders. On 24.12.2021, the order was passed so the prayer to set aside the impugned order by way of this revision is made.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has argued that the order dated 24.12.2021 is an interim order, hence, the revision against the same does not lie. Apart from this argument, it is also contended that the application to set aside this order was moved on the same day by the petitioner's counsel, which is still pending. The present revision is premature, hence the prayer to dismiss the revision is made.

¶9

In reply, the learned counsel for the revisionist has argued that the order dated 24.12.2021 is a final order though, it has been passed on the application for interim maintenance.

¶10

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusal of the record, it is clear that an application no.22 kha for setting aside the order dated 21.12.2021 is pending before the trial court and the date 12.01.2022 was fixed therein. The counsel for the revisionist has no knowledge about the order passed on 12.01.2022 but certainly as per counsel for the revisionist the application no. 22 kha to set aside the order dated 21.12.2021 is still pending.

¶11

In my opinion, the revisionist is having alternative remedy before the court below and for the same he already has applied there. His application is admittedly pending in the trial court to set aside order dated 21.12.2021.

¶12

In view of the above, the revision is disposed of with the direction to the lower court that in case the revisionist appears before the court below on the date fixed in the application No.22 kha and press the said application, the same shall be decided, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months from the date of presenting the certified copy of this order before it.

¶13

Order Date :- 23.2.2022 Radhika

¶14

Digitally signed by RADHIKA VISHWAKARMA Date: 2022.02.25 15:20:58 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharam 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sweta Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Sadakat Ali Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Jagdish Kushwaha Vs State of U.P.

Sanjeev Sahu @ Munna Vs State of U.P. and Another

Monu Urf Maan Singh Yadav (Minor) Vs State of U.P.and Another

Krishna Murari Chaubey Vs Smt. Madhuri Shukla