Dismissed¶13

Ravindra Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC23 Apr 2025A482/510/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

AHC 2025:AHC:61316; APPLICATION U/S 482 No. 510 of 2025; Raj Beer Singh, J.; dismissed. S.482 Cr.P.C. challenge to Family Court (Gautam Buddh Nagar) S.125 Cr.P.C. maintenance order dated 12.08.2024 in Case No. 442 of 2018 (Pooja Vs. Ravindra) rejected: order stood in compliance of High Court order dated 21.09.2022 directing Rs. 7 lakhs deposit by 20.10.2022 plus monthly allowance from October 2022; no patent illegality, perversity, abuse of process or miscarriage of justice found. Applicant: Ravindra Kumar (counsel Rahul Shukla); Opposite Party: State of U.P. and Another.

What did the court decide?

The learned Family Court passed the impugned order in compliance of this Court's order dated 21.09.2022, and no patent illegality or perversity could be shown in the impugned order. ¶12

Ravindra Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:61316

¶2

Court No. - 71

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 510 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Ravindra Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Shukla

¶5

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶7

This application under Section - 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred against order dated 12.08.2024, passed by learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Gautam Buddh Nagar, in Case No. 442 of 2018 (Pooja Vs. Ravindra), under Section - 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station - Beeta-2, District - Gautam Buddh Nagar.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that impugned order is against facts and law and thus, liable to be set aside. It was submitted that in pursuance to order dated 21.09.2022 passed by this Court in Application u/s 482 No. 29613 of 2022, applicant is ready to pay the amount of maintenance, as directed by this Court, but it is not clear that how much amount has to be paid by the applicant. Referring to these facts, it was submitted that impugned order may be set aside.

¶9

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

¶10

I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record.

¶11

It is apparent from record that earlier applicant has approached this Court by filing Application u/s 482 No. 29613 of 2022, which

¶12

was disposed of vide order dated 21.09.2022, wherein this Court has directed the applicant to deposit Rs. 7 lakhs on or before 20.10.2022 and apart from that applicant shall also pay monthly allowance as awarded by the Family Court concerned starting from October, 2022. It appears that the learned Family Court has passed the impugned order in compliance of order of this Court. No patent illegality or perversity could be shown in the impugned order. There is nothing to show that there has been any abuse of the process of Court or the impugned order has resulted into miscarriage of justice, so as to require any interference by this Court by invoking extraordinary powers under Section - 482 Cr.P.C. The application under Section - 482 Cr.P.C. lacks merit and thus liable to be dismissed.

¶13

Accordingly, the application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is hereby dismissed .

¶14

Order Date :- 23.4.2025 S Rawat

¶15

Digitally signed by :- SHOBHIT RAWAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ravindra Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravindra Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Hemant Yadav and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Vibha Pandey vs State of U.P. and Another

Bhuwan Chaudhary and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanjay Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Sheetal vs State of U.P. and Another

Vijay Kumar and Another vs State of U.P. and Another