Dismissed

Gulfam v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Sept 2023CRLR/1574/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal revision under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C., the Allahabad High Court dismissed the revisionist's plea challenging an order under Section 125 Cr.P.C. granting interim maintenance, finding the order legal and not excessive despite the revisionist's absence abroad.

What did the court decide?

Criminal revision dismissed; ex-parte order of 03.06.2019 upholds subject to cost and interim maintenance.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:176004

¶2

Court No. - 79

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1574 of 2022 Revisionist :- Gulfam Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Shyam Murari Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.

¶5

Rejoinder affidavit filed by learned counsel for the revisionist is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Shyam Murari Upadhyay, learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

In spite of service of notice, no one is present on behalf of opposite party no. 2.

¶8

This criminal revision has been filed by the revisionist against the order dated 28.03.2022, passed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court No. 2, Muzaffar Nagar, in Misc. Case No. 207/11 of 2022 (Case No. 653 of 2018) (Mohd. Gulfam vs. Farheen Begum), under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C. by which the application filed by the revisionist under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C. was allowed subject to payment of cost of Rs. 20,000/- and interim maintenance to the tune of Rs. 4,000/- per month to the opposite party no. 2.

¶9

Brief facts of the case is that the application filed by opposite party no. 2 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for maintenance against the revisionist was registered as Case No. 653/11 of 2018. The said case was allowed ex-parte vide judgment and order dated 03.06.2019 by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court No. 2, Muzaffar Nagar and the revisionist was directed to pay Rs. 10,000/- per month as maintenance to the opposite party no. 2 from the date of filing of application. The order dated 03.06.2019 was challenged by the revisionist by filing Criminal Revision (Defective) No. 19 of 2022, which was dismissed by this Court on the ground of alternative remedy on 02.03.2022, permitting the revisionist to move application under Section 126 Cr.P.C. The application filed by revisionist under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C., was registered as Misc. Case No. 207/11 of 2022 which was allowed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court No. 2, Muzaffar Nagar, vide order dated 28.03.2022 setting aside ex-parte order

¶10

dated 03.06.2019, subject to condition that the revisionist shall pay Rs. 20,000/- as cost and interim maintenance to the tune of Rs. 4,000/- per month to opposite party no. 2, till the disposal of case.

¶11

Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. has been filed by opposite party no. 2 on altogether incorrect fact. It is further submitted that the revisionist went to Saudi Arabia on 14.08.2018 and stayed there till 23.11.2021 and has no knowledge about the pendency of application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. filed by opposite party no. 2. Lastly, it is submitted that the learned court below has committed grave illegality in imposing cost and directing to pay interim maintenance.

¶12

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the revisionist and on perusal of record, it is apparent that the opposite party no. 2 is legally married wife of revisionist and the application filed by revisionist under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C. was allowed and ex-parte order dated 03.06.2019 was set aside, subject to payment of cost of Rs. 20,000/- and interim maintenance to the tune of Rs. 4,000/- per month to the opposite party no. 2, which cannot be said to be excessive in any manner.

¶13

No grounds of interference is made out. The present criminal revision is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed.

¶14

The criminal revision is dismissed , accordingly.

¶15

Order Date :- 6.9.2023 sailesh

¶16

Digitally signed by :- SAILESH PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Gulfam v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gulfam 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

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pradeep Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Amarjeet Kumar Pandey Vs Anupama Pandey

Smt. Alka @ Alka Dilhore and Another Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Km. Anchal Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Smt.Rahin and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Ankur Tripathi and Another Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others