This judgment dismisses an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging ex-parte maintenance orders. The Court noted the applicant failed to object despite opportunity and found no material illegality given the applicant's financial status, refusing interference.
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:139854
Court No. - 80
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 26427 of 2024
Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shatrughan Sonwal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.
despite opportunity being given, the applicant has not filed any objection to the maintenance petition, which forced the learned Principal Judge, Family Court to proceed with the case ex-parte . On examination of the order dated 12.04.2023, it's revealed that the applicant/husband owns a mobile shop and earns approximately Rs. 30,000/- per month. Besides this, he owns a house in Lucknow and recently purchased land amounting to Rs. 16,00,000/-. No material illegality or impropriety has been observed by this Court at this stage. Therefore, no interference is warranted by this Court.
Order Date :- 30.8.2024
Shafique
Justice Vinod Diwakar
Digitally signed by :- SAFIKUR RAHAMAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the Family Court's ex-parte maintenance order finding it arbitrary or mechanical.
Whether the applicant's failure to file objections after receiving opportunity warrants maintaining the impugned orders.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Rajnesh v. Neha and AnotherRelied on¶12
Rajnesh v. Neha and Another; (2021) 2 SCC 324 · Who else cites this
Rajesh Babu Saxena v. State of U.P. and anotherRelied on¶12
Rajesh Babu Saxena v. State of U.P. and another, passed by this Court in Criminal Revision Defective No. 1789 of 2023
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Vinay Kumar
State Of U.P.
Vinod Diwakar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
