Petitioner challenged interim maintenance order for not providing for temporary maintenance. Court directed reconsideration of the order under Section 125 Cr.P.C. in light of Rajnesh vs. Neha, with prior temporary payments to be adjusted.
Direction to reconsider interim maintenance order and adjust prior temporary payments.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:146204
Court No. - 87
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 8556 of 2024
Petitioner :- Mukesh Upadhyay Respondent :- Monika Upadhyay Counsel for Petitioner :- Mukesh Upadhyay
Hon'ble Ms. Nand Prabha Shukla,J.
Heard Sri Mukesh Upadhyay (petitioner) who appeared in person to argue the case through video conferencing.
It has been submitted by the petitioner in person that Section 125 Cr.P.C. does not provide for the award of Temporary Maintenance. Despite the fact, the petitioner in person was directed vide order dated 08.02.2021 to pay the Temporary Maintenance to the tune of Rs. 6000/- to the wife and Rs. 5000/- to the son per month, which had been duly complied. Now, vide order daed 04.04.2024, a fresh order has been passed for the grant of interim maintenance from the date of the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Hence the petitioner feels harassed.
However, it has also been submitted that the petitioner was already paying the temporary maintenance through order dated 08.02.2021 an amount of Rs. 6000/- to the wife and Rs. 5,000/- to the son.
Considering the aforesaid submission as discussed above, it is hereby directed to the court concerned to reconsider the interim maintenance awarded vide order dated 04.04.2024 and pass fresh order in accordance with law in the light of judgement rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajnesh vs. Neha, 2021 (2) SCC 324 and the amount paid as temporary maintenance be adjusted in computation of the interim maintenance which has been ordered to be paid from the date of application. The application dated 30.03.2024 moved by the petitioner under Section 340 Cr.P.C. be also decided expeditiously, if there is no other legal impediment.
With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date : - 9.9.2024 Puspendra
Digitally signed by :- PUSPENDRA NARAYAN SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether interim maintenance should be reconsidered in light of Rajnesh vs. Neha and prior temporary payments adjusted?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Rajnesh vs. NehaRelied on¶9
Rajnesh vs. Neha, 2021 (2) SCC 324 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Mukesh Upadhyay
Monika Upadhyay
Nand Prabha Shukla
Puspendra Narayan Singh
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
