Dismissed

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

Allahabad HC14 Nov 2024A482/38701/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by an accused challenging a recovery warrant issued by the Family Court under Section 125 Cr.P.C. The Court found that despite a final maintenance order, the applicant had failed to fully maintain his separated wife for over a year and eight months.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the recovery warrant was dismissed; no stay granted.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:182983

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 38701 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Vikash Sharma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Deepak Rana Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

¶6

Heard Mr. Deepak Rana, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State.

¶7

Perused the record.

¶8

Applicant-Vikash Sharma, who is a charge sheeted accused, has approached this Court by means of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the order dated 13.06.2024 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Bulandshahar in Misc. Case No.784 of 2023 (Smt. Gudiya Sharma @ Ruby and another Versus Vikash Sharma) arising out of Case No.292 of 2022 (Smt. Gudiya Sharma @ Ruby and another Versus Vikash Sharma), under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Jahangirabad, District Bulandshahar, whereby, recovery warrant has been issued against applicant.

¶9

At the very outset, the Court raised a pointed query as to whether the order passed in Section 125 Cr.P.C. has been stayed or not.

¶10

Learned counsel for applicant submits that final order dated 23.02.2023 was passed against applicant in proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Thereafter, recovery warrant was issued against applicant and he deposited a sum of Rs. 20,000/- towards part payment of arrears pending against him. Subsequently, an application under Section 126(2) was filed by applicant seeking recall of the order dated 23.02.2023. On the above premise, the learned counsel for applicant submits that further recovery in terms of the order impugned dated 13.06.2024 are liable to be stayed by this Court.

¶11

Per contra, the learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party-1 has vehemently opposed the present application. Learned A.G.A.

¶12

contends that it is an undisputed fact that complainant opposite party-2 is the legally wedded wife of applicant. As such, applicant is under a legal and moral obligations to maintain her. It is also an undisputed fact that wife is living separately from the applicant since 23.02.2023. A period of more than 1 year and 8 months has expired since the date of impugned order i.e. 23.02.2023 but applicant has only paid a sum of Rs. 20,000/- to opposite party-2 towards her maintenance. In view of above, the conduct of the applicant cannot be said to be rightful. On the above premise, the learned A.G.A. submits that applicant has failed to maintain his wife which is legally bound to do, therefore, no indulgence be granted by this Court in favour of applicant.

¶13

When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant could not overcome the same.

¶14

Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State, upon perusal of record and considering the facts that the objections raised by the learned A.G.A. in opposition to this application are clearly borne out from the record and further the same could not be dislodged by the learned counsel for applicant with reference to the record at this stage. As such, no interference is warranted by this Court.

¶15

As a result, the present application fails and is liable to be dismissed.

¶16

It is, accordingly, dismissed .

¶17

Order Date :- 14.11.2024 Imtiyaz

¶18

Digitally signed by :- IMTIYAZ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikash 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vijay Kumar Prajapati vs State of Up and 3 Others

Gajendra Yadav Alias Girish vs State of U.P. and Another

Nafis vs State of U.P. and Another

Tahsildar vs State of U.P. and Another

Ravi Singh @ Manu Varma and Another vs State of Up and Another

Amzad and 10 Others vs State of Up and Another