Allowed

Smt. Priyanka v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC9 Feb 2023A482/40644/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a habeas corpus-like application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Hon'ble High Court directed the lower court to dispose expediently of the applicant's Section 125 Cr.P.C. maintenance petition within six months, prohibiting casual adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the lower court to decide the maintenance petition expeditiously within six months; prohibition on casual adjournments.

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

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 40644 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Priyanka Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Devendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

This application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking direction to the court below to expedite the Case No. 85 of 2021 (Smt Priyanka and another Vs Dileep Kumar), under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., registered at Police Station Surir, District Mathura.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that on 21.01.2021, the applicant has filed an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. seeking maintenance from the opposite party no.2, but till date her application has not been decided. He submits that in the proceeding under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., the court is under obligation to decide the said application expeditiously. He submits that a direction may be issued to the court below to decide the application of the applicant expeditiously otherwise the very purpose of filing of this petition would be frustrated.

¶8

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the present application is disposed of with the direction to the court below to decide the maintenance petition of the applicant expeditiously. The court below is further directed not to grant adjournment to the opposite party no.2 in a casual manner and if in the meanwhile the applicant files any application seeking interim maintenance, the same shall also be decided expeditiously. In any case, the court below is directed to finally decide the case within six months from the next date of hearing upon production of a certified copy of this order before the court below. It is made clear that court below will not be influenced by any observation made by this Court and shall decide the case strictly in accordance with law on its own merit.

¶9

The application is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶10

Order Date :- 9.2.2023 RavindraKSingh

¶11

Digitally signed by :- RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Priyanka v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Priyanka 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

Severam Kasana Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Zainuddin and 15 Others Vs State of U.P and Another

Brajesh and 9 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rahul Dhir Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Kedar Rajbhar and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another