Disposed

Himanshu Sharma v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC10 Sept 2024A482/13210/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by directing the Family Court to appoint an Amicus Curiae from a suggested list of advocates. The Amicus was directed to visit the jail and file appropriate applications on behalf of the applicant, who is in custody due to default in maintenance payments, ensuring his version is considered.

What did the court decide?

Order disposed with direction to appoint Amicus Curiae to visit jail and file appropriate applications under Section 126 Cr.P.C. within four weeks.

Himanshu Sharma vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:147061

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 13210 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Himanshu Sharma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Ram Surat Patel, Advocate holding brief of Sri. Ashutosh Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.K.Singh,learned A.G.A.

¶7

By means of this application, applicant has prayed for quashing of an ex-parte order dated 22.5.2023 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court Sambhal at Chandausi in Case No.149/2022 (Smt.Shimpi Sharma & Another Vs. Himanshu Sharma) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station-Chandausi, District-Sambhal at Chandausi with a further prayer to direct the Family Court to decide the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. on merit after providing opportunity of hearing to the applicant.

¶8

Applicant before this Court is husband of O.P. No.2 and Father of O.P. No.3.

¶9

Proceedings were initiated at the instance of O.P. No.2 and 3 against applicant in the year 2022 by way of filing an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C.. Said application was proceeded exparte and finally it was decided vide order dated 22.5.2023 with a direction to pay Rs.10,000/- per month to wife and Rs.5000/- per month to his daughter.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that it is the case of

¶11

applicant that no notice was served upon him as his whereabouts were not known to his family members. At belated stage, applicant returned back to his home in the month of September, 2023, however, he was immediately sent to jail since meanwhile, recovery warrants were issued against him on an application filed by O.P. No.2 and 3 under Section 125 (3) Cr.P.C..

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that applicant is in jail since he has repeatedly committed default and no one from his family is legally aware to put his case.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant by referring documents on record submitted that applicant has filed an application purportedly under Section 126 (2) Cr.P.C. to recall the ex-parte order. However, it appears that prayers made in last paragraph of it was only in regard to appointment of Amicus Curiae. Said application was rejected vide order dated 16.1.2024. For reference, said order is reproduced hereinafter:

¶14

"16.01 2024

¶15

पतत्रावलली पपेश हहयली। वत्राददिनली मय वत्रादिदमत हत्राजजिर। दवपकली कको उसकपे दपतत्रा कपे पत् र ारनत्रापत पर आजि कत् र ात्रागत् र ा सपे तलब दकयत्रा गयत्रा। वत्राददिनली ककी ओर सपे

¶16

पत् र ारनत्रापत इस आशय कत्रा ददियत्रा गयत्रा दक दवपकली न्यत्रायत्रालय मम न्यत्रादयक अदभिरकत्रा मम उपससरत हहै तरत्रा धनरत्रादश जिमत्रा नहहीं कर रहत्रा हहै। अततः दवपकली सपे 2,10,000/- रूपयपे ददिलत्रायपे जित्रायम।

¶17

दवपकली दहमत्रामांशशू शमत्ा सपे मपेरपे दत् र र ात्रा धनरत्रादश जिमत्रा करनपे कपे जलए कहत्रा गयत्रा तको

¶18

उसनपे कहत्रा दक अगर पहैसत्रा हकोतत्रा तको मम क्यत्रा जिपेल मम हकोतत्रा। दवपकली कपे आचरण

¶19

सपे यह पतलीत दवपकली अपनली पत्नली व बचचों कको भिरण -पकोषण धनरत्रादश अदित्रा नहहीं करनत्रा चत्राहतत्रा हहै। उक्त पररससरदतयचों मम दवपकली कत्रा वत् र ाण्ट बनत्रायत्रा जित्रायपे तरत्रा उसपे ददिनत्रामांक 21.04.2022 सपे ददिनत्रामांक 20.05.2022 ककल एक मत्राह कपे दडिफत्राल्ट कपे बदिलपे एक मत्राह कपे जलए ददिनत्रामांक 15.02.2023 तक जजिलत्रा कत् र ात्रागत् र ा भिपेजित्रा जित्रायपे। दवपकली चत्राहपे तको दनयत दतजर सपे पशूवर आमांदशक यत्रा सम्पशूणर धनरत्रादश अदित्रा करकपे, अवम क दकयपे जित्रानपे ककी यत्राचनत्रा कर सकतत्रा हहै।

¶20

दवपकली ककी ओर सपे एक पत् र ारनत्रापत इस आशय कत्रा ददियत्रा गयत्रा दक पत् र ार्थी मत्रामलपे मम पहैरवली करनपे मम असहत्राय व असमरर हहै, ऐसली ससरदत मम मत्राननलीय न्यत्रायत्रालय सपे दनवपेदिन हहै दक पत् र ार्थी कको न्यत्रायदहत मम दवजधक सलत्राहकत् र ा / अजधवक् त पदित्रान करनपे ककी ककपत्रा करम, तत्रादक पत् र ार्थी मत्राननलीय न्यत्रायत्रालय कपे समक अपनली सत्राक्ष्य व पक पसतकत कर सकपे। चशूमांदक पसतकत मत्रामलत्रा धत् र ात्रा 125 (3) दिमां.प.समां. सपे समांबमांजधत हहै, जजिसमम दवपकली कको कपेवल भिरण-पकोषण धनरत्रादश ककी अदित्रायपेगली करनली हहै। उक्त पककीणर वत्रादि मम न तको ककोई सत्राक्ष्य पसतकत हकोनली हहै, न हली ककोई बहस हकोनली हहै और न हली ककोई न्यत्राय दनणरयन हकोनत्रा हहै। पसतकत मत्रामलपे मम दवपकली कको ककोई वत्रादिदमत ददिलत्रायपे जित्रानपे ककोई न्यत्रायकोदचत आधत् र ा नहहीं हहै। उपरकोक्त पररससरदत मम दवपकली कत्रा पत् र ारनत्रापत दनरसत दकयत्रा जित्रातत्रा हहै। पतत्रावलली ददिनत्रामांक 15.02.2024 कको वत्रासतपे अदित्रायपेगली पपेश हको। दनयत ददिनत्रामांक 15.02.2024 कको दवपकली कको अदित्रायगली हपेतक जिपेल सपे तलब दकयत्रा जित्रायपे।

¶21

Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that applicant is still behind bar since there was a repeated default on his behalf. Applicant has no means of earning his livelihood and he cannot be kept behind bar for indefinite period despite his repeated default in payment of maintenance amount. A prayer has also been made to release him on bail.

¶22

Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that if an application is filed under Section 125 (3) Cr.P.C. then applicant may have a liberty to present his case as well as his reason for his non-appearance. However, since applicant is in jail, therefore, he is not able to file an appropriate application.

¶23

Learned A.G.A. submitted that this Court may consider to appoint Amicus Curiae at Family Court, in Sambhal at Chandausi.

¶24

In aforesaid circumstances, I find that version of applicant is required to be considered by learned Family Court as well as applicant is at liberty to file an application under Section 126 (3) Cr.P.C.

¶25

At this stage, Sri Ashutosh Upadhyay, Advocate who is aware about said Family Court, Sambhal at Chandausi referred few names of Advocates namely Sri Rajul Bhargav, Sri Gopal Sharma, Sri Sunil Kumar Singh, Sri Ram Kumar Singh and Sri Aftab Husain, Advocates. He submitted that any one from above can be appointed as an Amicus Curiae.

¶26

I have considered the above submissions.

¶27

At this stage, prayer of the applicant could not be considered, since he has to file at first instance to recall the order passed under Section 125 Cr.P.C., therefore, this application is disposed of with a direction that a copy of this order be communicated to concerned

¶28

Family Court with a direction to appoint anyone from above referred Advocates as Amicus Curiae who will visit jail under prescribed procedure and will file an appropriate applications in accordance with law. In case, any application is filed under Section 126 (2) Cr.P.C. same shall be considered and decided within a period of four weeks thereafter.

¶29

Learned Amicus Curiae will also enclose legal provisions and judgments in regard to period of arrest in case of repeated default under Section 125 Cr.P.C. such as judgment passed by this Court in Mohammad Usman Vs. State of U.P. 2021 SCC Online All 640 as well as judgment passed by High Court of Bombay in J. Vs. The State of Maharashtra, 2024: BHC-A.S.8917.

¶30

Registrar (Compliance) to take steps.

¶31

Order Date :- 10.9.2024 SB

¶32

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP BHATTACHARYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Himanshu Sharma v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Himanshu Sharma v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shazia Khan and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Akhtar Ovaishi vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd Siraj Saifi and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Bahadur Singh Alias Rajbahadur vs State of U.P. and Another

Sheelendra Pal Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramprakash Yadav vs State of Up and Another