Dismissed

Anand Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC4 Oct 2023A482/28202/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an application under S. 482 Cr.P.C. to quash an interim maintenance order awarding maintenance to the applicant's wife and minor daughter. The High Court dismissed the application, holding the Family Court's finding on income was based on evidence and the order was just and proper.

What did the court decide?

Application under S. 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the interim maintenance order was dismissed.

Anand Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:190262

¶2

Court No. - 89

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28202 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Anand Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Mishra,Santosh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State.

¶7

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the order dated 17.04.2023 passed in Maintenance Case No.93 of 2021 passed by Principal Family Judge, Bhadohi, Gyanpur, U/s 125(4)(5) Cr.P.C.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has challenged the order dated 17.04.2023 by which Principal Judge, Family Court has allowed the interim maintenance on application of opposite party No.2, wife of the applicant. He further submitted that the court below while deciding the interim maintenance, objection of the applicant has not considered and has wrongly held that applicant is earning Rs.80,000/- per month. The finding recorded by court below is not based on any evidence on record and the same is liable to be set aside.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the submissions raised by applicant's counsel.

¶10

Considered the submissions raised by applicant's counsel and perused the record, it is evident that the order passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhadohi, Gyanpur vide order dated 17.04.2023 required no interference as the order is based on evidence filed by opposite party No.2 and it has held that applicant is earning Rs.80,000/- per month. It is also held that opposite party no.2 is wife of applicant and she is not in a position to maintain herself as well as her minor daughter. Applicant has not deposited maintenance amount to opposite party no.2 till date. Instant 482 Cr.P.C. application is filed to challenge the interim maintenance, whereas final verdict has to come after considering the evidence produced by applicant and opposite party no.2. Order passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhadohi, Gyanpur is just and proper and no interference is warranted, at this stage.

¶11

The present 482 application is dismissed with the aforesaid observation.

¶12

Order Date :- 4.10.2023 Nitin Verma

¶13

Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anand Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anand Sharma 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

Shiv Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gopal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ravikulbhushan Dayal and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt Ritu and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajveer Singh Vs State of U.P.

Shamshunisha and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another