Smt. Manisha Nigam Vs Somanshu Nigam

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 3812 of 2024

Smt. Manisha Nigam

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

Somanshu Nigam .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pawan Kumar Nigam, Ram Babu Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Tarun Kumar Pandey, Aditya Tiwari, Jai Prakash Yadav

¶7

Court No. - 8

¶8

HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR, J.

¶9

1. Heard.

¶10

The present contempt application has been preferred against noncompliance of interim order dated 12.12.2023 passed in Criminal Revision No.1268 of 2023, the relevant portion of the order is quoted hereinbelow:

¶11

"As this is a revision against final order dated 16.10.2023 passed on the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Neither the original file nor the certified copy of the statements of the witnesses have been placed before the court. Therefore, it is not possible to hear the revision today.

¶12

Trial court record be summoned

¶13

List on 08.01.2024 for disposal.

¶14

However, the revisionist is directed to pay the monthly amount of maintenance of Rs. 10,000/- per month regularly, as ordered by the trial court vide order dated 16.10.2023, on 5th day (if holiday on next working day) of each month to his wife. Regarding arrears of maintenance, the revisionist is directed to pay the same in three equal installments each to be paid on 5th day of every alternative month starting from January, 2024."

¶15

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that initially the trial court vide order dated 16.10.2023 had directed for payment of maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month regularly and the arrears in three equal installments. The respondent filed the criminal revision against the order dated 16.10.2023 in which on 12.12.2023 the interim order has been granted which is quoted above. Despite the order passed by the trial Court and the interim order in the criminal revision filed by respondent, the

¶16

CAPL No. 3812 of 2024

¶17

2

¶18

respondent has not paid even a single penny after 12.12.2023 i.e. the maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month regularly and the arrears. In the compelling circumstances the applicant has preferred the present contempt application in which time to time the orders have been passed. On 1st September, 2025 the time was granted and the case was fixed for 15.09.2025. On 15.09.2025 due to non-compliance of the order, the charge was framed against the respondent - Somanshu Nigam. The respondent has filed his reply / explanation to the charge on 12.10.2025. The applicant has been moving applications for exemption from appearance on the medical ground and on the undertaking of the counsel for the respondent that he will appear on the next date fixed, the Court twice granted time by allowing the exemption application preferred by the respondent. Today again another application has been moved for exemption from appearance on medical ground.

¶19

It is further submitted that the applicant has neither paid maintenance nor arrears in pursuance of the interim order dated 12.12.2023 and is liable to be punished under Section 12 of the Contempt Act, 1971.

¶20

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that the respondent is not in a position to pay such a huge amount of Rs.10,000/- per month regularly as his income is only Rs.6,000/- from all sources and he is ready to pay the maintenance after the final decision in the criminal revision preferred by the respondent and till the final decision in the criminal revision he is not in a position to make any payment to the applicant.

¶21

It is further submitted that the applicant is earning more than the respondent. This submission of the learned counsel for the respondent could not be decided or seen in the contempt proceedings and as per admitted case of the learned counsel for the respondent, this ground was taken in the criminal revision and despite this ground the interim order has been passed.

¶22

It is further submitted that despite best efforts the Criminal Revision could not be taken up and it is still pending.

¶23

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record and reply of the respondent to the charge framed by this Court, the position which emerges out is that after the charge was framed the respondent has chosen not to appear before this Court. The Court accommodated him twice on the undertaking of his counsel that on the next date he would appear but today for third time the application has been moved for exemption from appearance which is turned down for the reason that the respondent has not made any effort to make payment to the applicant as directed by the interim order passed in the Criminal

¶24

CAPL No. 3812 of 2024

¶25

3

¶26

Revision and since 12.12.2023 he has not paid even a single penny to the applicant.

¶27

The submission of the learned counsel for the respondent that he is ready to pay the maintenance but after the final decision in the criminal revision is not tenable in the eyes of law as the interim order dated 12.12.2023 is still in existence and is in operation. The respondent has not enclosed any document to show that what steps he had taken for early disposal of the criminal revision. The non- compliance of the interim order passed by the Revisional Court dated 12.12.2023 is willful and intentional, for which the the respondent is liable to be punished under Section 12 of the Contempt Court Act, 1971.

¶28

Accordingly, the respondent - Somanshu Nigam is awarded a sentence of two months simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2000/-

¶29

The amount of fine shall be deposited within one month and he shall surrender before the C.J.M. Kanpur Nagar to serve the sentence within two weeks from today. In case he does not surrender within the time given above, the C.J.M. Kanpur Nagar shall cause him to be arrested to serve the sentence.

¶30

In view of the facts and discussion made hereinabove, the Contempt Application is allowed.

¶31

The Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the C.J.M. Kanpur Nagar.

¶32

(Manish Kumar,J.)

¶33

October 28, 2025

¶34

S. Kumar

¶35

Digitally signed by :- SANTOSH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Smt. Manisha Nigam v. Somanshu Nigam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Manisha Nigam v. Somanshu Nigam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt. Ram Kumari Vs Smt. Mala Srivastava, D.M., Raebareli

Raj Kumari Vs Rakesh Singh, M.D. U.P. State Bridge Corp. Ltd., Lko. and Another

Rajendra Bahadur Singh Vs Prof. Akhtar Haseeb V.C Narendra Deo Univ.of Agriculture and

Ram Sagar and 2 Others Vs Sri Shivendra Verma Sub Divisional Magistrate Dist. Unnao and 3 Others

Neeraj Yadav Vs Shri Subhash Singh, Sub-Divisional Officer Ambedkar Nagar

Sahj Ram Das Vs Smt. Preeti Singh Up Ziladhikari Tehsil Sirauli Gauspur Distt. Barabanki and Another