Dismissed¶14

Shashi Shankar Dubey v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC23 Mar 2025NA528/9380/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 528 BNSS application dismissed; recovery warrants under Section 128 Cr.P.C. for arrears of Section 125 Cr.P.C. maintenance upheld; ex-parte maintenance judgment dated 04.06.2018 by Principal Judge, Family Court, Sonebhadra (Misc. Case No.175 of 2023, Kiran Vs. Shashi Shankar Dubey); applicant left free to challenge ex-parte judgment in accordance with law; Raj Beer Singh, J.; High Court of Judicature at Allahabad; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:42488; Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 9380 of 2025; order date 24.3.2025.

What did the court decide?

Perusal of record shows nothing to indicate abuse of the process of court, nor any material illegality or perversity in the impugned order issuing recovery warrants. ¶13

Shashi Shankar Dubey Vs State of U.P. and Another — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:42488

¶2

Court No. - 71

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 9380 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Shashi Shankar Dubey Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Nanda Kumar Shukla,Pranav Kumar Tripathi

¶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 u/s 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as B.N.S.S.) has been preferred against the order dated 04.01.2025, passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Sonebhadra, in Misc. Case No.175 of 2023 (Kiran Vs. Shashi Shankar Dubey), under Section 128 Cr.P.C., Police StationPannuganj, District- Sonebhadra, whereby recovery warrants have been issued against applicant.

¶9

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the opposite party no.2 has filed a case under Section 125 Cr.P.C. against applicant, which was decided by ex-parte judgment dated 04.06.2018, whereby maintenance @ Rs.2000/- per month was granted to the opposite party no.2 and maintenance @ Rs.15,00/per month was granted for her minor child. Applicant has no knowledge about the said ex-parte judgment. It was submitted that after lapse of long time, the opposite party no.2 has initiated proceedings under Section 128 Cr.P.C. for recovery of arrears of maintenance, wherein the impugned order has been passed, by which recovery warrant has been issued against applicant. It was

¶10

submitted that impugned order is against fact and law and thus liable to be set aside.

¶11

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

¶12

I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record.

¶13

Perusal of record shows that the opposite party no.2 and her child were granted maintenance by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Sonebhadra under Section 125 Cr.P.C. vide ex-parte order dated 04.06.2018 and thereafter impugned proceedings under Section 128 Cr.P.C. were initiated. There is nothing to show that there has been any abuse of the process of court or the impugned order suffers from any material illegality or perversity. However, the applicant would be at liberty to challenge the ex-parte judgment dated 04.06.2018 in accordance with law. The application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. lacks merit and thus liable to be dismissed.

¶14

Accordingly, the application u/s 528 B.N.S.S. is dismissed .

¶15

As requested by learned counsel for the applicant, the certified copy of order dated 04.06.2018 may be returned back to the learned counsel for the applicant after retaining the photocopy of the same on record.

¶16

Order Date :- 24.3.2025 'SP'/-

¶17

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

Shashi Shankar Dubey v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shashi Shankar Dubey 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