Disposed¶14

Sueb @ Shoib v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC18 Mar 2025NA528/8779/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court; APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. 8779 of 2025; Raj Beer Singh, J.; Section 528 BNSS; Section 128 Cr.P.C.; Section 145(2) BNSS; maintenance arrears; recovery warrants; ex-parte maintenance order dated 07.02.2024; Family Court Muzaffarnagar; Case No. 480 of 2024; Sueb @ Shoib; Smt. Shabana Praveen; Rs.1,50,000/- paid; no interference; prayer refused; expedite disposal within six months; order dated 19.3.2025; neutral citation 2025:AHC:39123.

What did the court decide?

Main prayer (restraint of coercive process for maintenance arrears pending disposal of the Section 145(2) BNSS application) refused; the Family Court directed to decide the Section 145(2) BNSS recall application expeditiously, preferably within six months, provided there is no legal impediment. ¶14

Sueb @ Shoib Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶14

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned order dated 28.02.2025 passed by the Family Court issuing recovery warrants against the applicant for arrears of maintenance warranted interference by the High Court under Section 528 BNSS. +1 more

¶12

Court's answer

No abuse of the process of court or any other patent illegality could be shown in respect of the impugned order dated 28.02.2025; no case for interference was made out and the applicant's prayer was refused.

¶12

Ratio / Principle

The Family Court concerned was directed to expedite the proceedings of the applicant's application under Section 145(2) BNSS and decide it expeditiously, preferably within six months from production of a copy of the order, provided there is no legal impediment.

¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Application under S.528 BNSS against order dated 28.02.2025 of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Muzaffarnagar, in S.128 Cr.P.C. proceedings (Case No. 480 of 2024, Smt. Shabana Praveen and others vs. Sueb @ Shoib) issuing recovery warrants against the applicant-husband for arrears of maintenance awarded to opposite party nos.2 to 5 (wife and children) by ex-parte order dated 07.02.2024. Counsel pointed out that Rs.1,50,000/- had already been paid and that the applicant's S.145(2) BNSS application to recall the ex-parte judgment was pending. The Court found no abuse of the process of court or patent illegality in the impugned order, held no case for interference was made out, refused the prayer, and disposed of the application, while directing the Family Court to expedite and decide the S.145(2) BNSS application expeditiously, preferably within six months of production of the order's copy, provided there is no legal impediment. (Raj Beer Singh, J.; order dated 19.3.2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:39123

¶2

Court No. - 71

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 8779 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Sueb @ Shoib Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Kumar Yadav,Sandeep Kumar Yadav

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

This application under Section 528 BNSS has been preferred against order dated 28.02.2025, passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Muzaffarnagar, in Case No. 480 of 2024 (Smt. Shabana Praveen and others vs. Sueb @ Shoib), under Section 128 Cr.P.C., Police Station - Kotwali Nagar, District - Muzaffarnagar, whereby the recovery warrants have been issued against the applicant.

¶9

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the opposite party nos.2 to 5 were awarded maintenance by the Family Court vide ex-parte order dated 07.02.2024 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Muzaffarnagar. Thereafter, the opposite party nos.2 to 5 have initiated proceedings under Section 128 Cr.P.C. for recovery of arrears of maintenance. Meanwhile, the applicant has also filed an application under Section 145(2) BNSS to recall the said ex-parte judgment dated 07.02.2024. It was submitted that before deciding the said application, the Family Court has passed impugned order, whereby recovery warrants have been issued against applicant. It was further pointed out that an amount of

¶10

Rs.1,50,000/- has already been paid by the applicant. Referring to facts of the matter, it was submitted that till the disposal of application filed by the applicant under Section 145(2) BNSS, no coercive process may be adopted against the applicant for arrears of maintenance.

¶11

Learned AGA has submitted that there is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order.

¶12

Perusal of record shows that applicant is husband of opposite party no.2 and father of applicant nos.3 to 5. Said opposite parties were awarded maintenance vide ex-parte judgment dated 07.02.2024. The opposite party nos.2 to 5 have initiated proceedings under Section 128 Cr.P.C. for recovery of arrears of maintenance and in those proceedings impugned order dated 28.02.2025 has been passed, wherein a direction was made for issuance of recovery warrants for realisation of arrears of maintenance. No abuse of the process of court or any other patent illegality could be shown in respect of impugned order. Thus no case for interference in impugned order dated 28.02.2025 is made out. Hence prayer sought by applicant is refused.

¶13

However, considering facts of the matter, the Family Court concerned is directed to expedite the proceedings of the application filed by the applicant under Section 145(2) BNSS and to decide the same expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of copy of this order before the court concerned, provided there is no legal impediment.

¶14

The application under Section 528 BNSS is disposed of accordingly.

¶15

Order Date :- 19.3.2025

¶16

'SP'/-

¶17

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sueb @ Shoib v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sueb @ Shoib v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

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