Disposed

Ravi v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC22 Oct 2024A482/20645/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenged an ex-parte maintenance order and recovery warrants issued in a Section 125 Cr.P.C. case. The court found no illegality or perversity but directed the Family Court to decide the pending recall application promptly.

What did the court decide?

The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of; the Family Court is directed to decide the pending Section 126(2) Cr.P.C. application expeditiously.

Ravi vs State of U.P. and Another — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:167983

¶2

Court No. - 75

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20645 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ravi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Satyendra Narayan Singh,Tarun Kumar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶6

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

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the order dated 03.11.2022, passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ghaziabad, in Criminal Case No.119 of 2021 (Sanjana Vs. Ravi), under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police StationNandgram, District- Ghaziabad. The order dated 01.04.2024 passed by aforesaid Court in Misc. Case No.32 of 2023, under Section 125(3) Cr.P.C. is also being impugned in the present application.

¶8

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is husband of the opposite party no.2. The opposite party no.2 has filed a case under Section 125 Cr.P.C. making false and baseless allegation and this case was decided by ex-parte judgment and order dated 03.11.2022 granting maintenance @ Rs.5,000/per month to the opposite party no.2. It is submitted that when applicant came to know about the said judgment, he has filed an application under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C. along with application under Section 5 Limitation Act for recall of said ex-parte judgment. The application under Section 5 Limitation Act, has

¶9

already been allowed by the Family Court vide order dated 06.02.2024 but the application under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C. is still pending and meanwhile recovery warrants have been issued against applicant vide order dated 01.04.2024. it was submitted that both the impugned orders are liable to be set aside.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that there is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order.

¶11

I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record.

¶12

Perusal of record shows that the opposite party no.2 is wife of applicant and she has filed the aforesaid case under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for maintenance. The said case was decided by ex-parte judgment and order dated 03.11.2022 granting maintenance to the opposite party no.2 @ Rs.5,000/- per month. The application to recall the said ex-parte judgment is still stating pending before the Family Court. No material illegality or perversity could be shown in the impugned order dated 01.04.2024.

¶13

In view of aforesaid, no case for interference in the impugned orders is made out. However, the Family Court concerned is directed to decide the application under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C. filed by the applicant expeditiously in accordance with law.

¶14

With aforesaid observations, the application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of .

¶15

Order Date :- 22.10.2024

¶16

SP/-

¶17

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

Ravi v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi 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

Kripashankar Tiwari and 2 Others vs State of Up ANOther

Dhirendra Kumar Maurya vs State of U.P. and Another

Virendra vs State of U.P. and Another

Farrokh Alias Bhoora and 9 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Satish Kumar and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Devdatt Gosvami and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another