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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 13.6.2025 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Varanasi (directing separate hearing of Misc. Case no. 730 of 2025 under Section 340 Cr.P.C.) suffers from illegality and is liable to be quashed.

Court's answer

The impugned order dated 13.6.2025 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Varanasi was passed after considering the entire material available on record and does not suffer from any illegality; no ground raised through the instant application is sustainable to intervene in the impugned order, which is highly justified and legal.

Ratio / Principle

In view of the foregoing discussion, the instant application under Section 528 BNSS lacks merit and is dismissed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Saurabh Srivastava, J.), Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 26482 of 2025, Ravindra Singh vs. State of U.P. and Another — dismissed (October 13, 2025). The applicant sought quashing of the order dated 13.6.2025 of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Varanasi, passed in petition no. 943 of 2024 (Smt. Beena Yadav vs. Ravindra Yadav) under Section 146 BNSS, directing separate hearing of Misc. Case no. 730 of 2025 (Ravindra Singh vs. Beena Yadav) under Section 340 Cr.P.C. Context: opposite party no. 2, the applicant's wife, had already been awarded maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C.; her Section 146 BNSS case (no. 943 of 2024) was pending; the applicant had filed Complaint Case no. 730 of 2025 under Section 340 Cr.P.C. alleging submission of a false affidavit and praying for prosecution under sections 199, 191, 193 and 209 IPC, and on 13.6.2025 sought early proceedings therein and interim stay of Case no. 943 of 2025. The Court held that the impugned order was passed after consideration of the entire material on record, suffered no illegality, and was highly justified and legal; no ground was sustainable to intervene, and the application, lacking merit, was dismissed.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 26482 of 2025

Ravindra Singh

.....Applicant(s)

Versus
State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rohit Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 77

HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

Heard Sri Rohit Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for applicant and learned AGA for State.

Present applicant has been preferred with prayer to quash order 13.6.2025 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Varanasi passed in petition no. 943 of 2024 (Smt. Beena Yadav vs. Ravindra Yadav) under Section 146 BNSS, wherein learned Principal Judge, Family Court passed the order for separate the hearing of Misc. Case no. 730 of 2025 (Ravindra Singh vs. Beena Yadav) under Section 340 Cr.P.C.

Learned counsel for applicant submitted that earlier, opposite party no. 2 who is wife of applicant has already been awarded maintenance by learned Principal Judge Family Court, Varanasi in pursuance to case filed at the behest of opposite party no. 2 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Later on, case no. 943 of 2024 has been filed before learned court concerned at the behest of opposite party no. 2 under Section 146 BNSS which is pending. Applicant filed Complaint Case no. 730 of 2025 against opposite party no. 2 under Section 340 Cr.P.C. wherein he mentioned certain guilty averments and facts against opposite party no. 2 including the allegation that opposite party no. 2 has submitted false affidavit before learned court concerned and prayed to prosecute opposite party no. 2 under sections 199, 191, 193 and 209 IPC. Applicant on dated 13.6.2025 also filed his application in aforesaid Case no. 943 of 2024 and prayed to initiate the proceeding early in Complaint Case no. 730 of 2025 and pass interim stay order in proceeding of Case no. 943 of 2025 but the application dated 13.6.2025 has been decided vide impugned order dated 13.6.2025 passed by learned court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Varanasi whereby he passed the order for separate hearing of Misc. Case no. 730 of 2025.

NA528 No. 26482 of 2025

2

Learned counsel for applicant submitted that impugned order has been passed without considering material on record and is illegal and liable to be quashed.

Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer sought through instant application.

From perusal of records, this Court finds that impugned order dated 13.6.2025 has been passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Varanasi after considering the entire material available on record and the same does not suffer from any illegality, hence no ground raised through instant application is sustainable to intervene in the impugned order which is highly justified and legal.

In view of foregoing discussion, application lacks merit hence dismissed .

(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)

October 13, 2025

Shaswat

Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad