Disposed

Dildar Hussain v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC14 Aug 2024/950/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In criminal revision, the Allahabad High Court disposed of the petition without deciding on a proposal to adjust revision costs towards maintenance arrears, leaving the adjustment to be determined by the Family Court if applied for.

What did the court decide?

Revision disposed of; revisionist permitted to apply for adjustment of costs towards maintenance arrears.

Dildar Hussain Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy… — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:56260

¶2

Court No. - 11

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 950 of 2024

¶4

Revisionist :- Dildar Hussain

¶5

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Vimal Kishor Singh,Premkant Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.

¶7

Heard.

¶8

Instant revision under Section 19(4) of the Family Court Act has been filed aggrieved against the order dated 04.07.2024 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Balrampur in Case No.262 of 2023 under Section 126(2) of Cr.P.C.

¶9

By the said order, the learned family court while allowing the application for recall of the ex-parte order dated 05.04.2022 passed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. whereby an amount of Rs.3,000/- per month had been granted to the respondent no.2 herein has required the revisionist to give cost of Rs.50,0000/for recall of the said order.

¶10

Learned counsel for the revisionist fairly admits that in pursuance to the order of the family court dated 05.04.2022 no amount has been paid by the revisionist to respondent no.2 and thus as on date approximately an amount of Rs.80,000/- still stands due to be paid by the revisionist to respondent no.2.

¶11

However, learned counsel for the revisionist states that in case the aforesaid cost of Rs.50,000/- is adjusted towards the maintenance which is to be paid to respondent no.2 he would not have any objection.

¶12

Considering the aforesaid, the revision is disposed of leaving it open to the revisionist to file an application before the learned court praying for adjustment of the cost as awarded vide order dated 04.07.2024 towards the maintenance as payable to the respondent no.2 in pursuance to the order dated 05.04.2022 or any interim maintenance which may be fixed by the learned court.

¶13

In case such an application is filed then the learned court would proceed to decide the same in accordance with law after

¶14

hearing all the parties concerned provided there is no legal impediment.

¶15

Order Date :- 14.8.2024 A. Katiyar

¶16

Digitally signed by :- AMIT KATIYAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Dildar Hussain v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dildar Hussain v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pratibha Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Satyendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 2 Others

Ashutosh @ Satyam Mishra and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Baburam Tiwari @ Virendra Kumar Tiwari and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. , Lko. and Another

Suresh Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Ram Khelawan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. P.W.D Lko. and 2 Others