Sarita Devi v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC17 Mar 2025NA529/488/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: Section 529 BNSS application; time-bound/expeditious disposal of maintenance case; Case No. 286 of 2021 under Section 125 CrPC; Family Court Allahabad (P.S. Khuldabad); interim maintenance ordered but unpaid; alleged deliberate delay by opposite party no.2; six-month deadline tied to production of certified copy of order; bar on unnecessary adjournments; application disposed of (not dismissed/allowed); Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:38253; decision date 18.3.2025; bench: Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava, J.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the court concerned (Family Court, Allahabad) to decide Case No. 286 of 2021 under Section 125 CrPC in accordance with law within six months from production of a certified copy of the order, if there is no legal impediment, and that no unnecessary adjournment will be sought/granted. ¶¶12

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶12

Issue for consideration

Whether the court concerned (Family Court, Allahabad) should be directed to decide the applicant's pending maintenance case (Case No. 286 of 2021 under Section 125 CrPC) within a stipulated period.

¶¶6

Court's answer

The Court directed that the court concerned decide Case No. 286 of 2021 (Section 125 CrPC) in accordance with law within six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before it, if there is no legal impediment.

¶¶11

Ratio / Principle

It was further directed that no unnecessary adjournment will be sought/granted in the case.

¶¶11

Key takeaways

From the record, opposite party no.2 is not paying the interim maintenance amount ordered by the Court and is also attempting to delay the case proceedings on one pretext or the other; this factual position formed the stated circumstance for issuing the time-bound direction.obiter¶¶10

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (single bench: Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava, J.; order dated 18.3.2025; Application U/S 529 BNSS No. 488 of 2025; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:38253). Sarita Devi applied under Section 529 BNSS for a direction that Case No. 286 of 2021 under Section 125 CrPC — her maintenance claim against her husband, pending since 2021 before the learned Family Judge, Family Court, Allahabad (P.S. Khuldabad, District Allahabad) — be decided within a stipulated period. She submitted that although interim maintenance had been ordered in her favour, opposite party no.2 had not complied and no maintenance was being paid, leaving her in a condition of starvation for want of money. Finding from the record that opposite party no.2 was neither paying the ordered interim maintenance nor refraining from delaying the proceedings on one pretext or the other, the Court directed that the case be decided in accordance with law within six months from the date of production of a certified copy of the order before the court concerned, if there is no legal impediment, and further directed that no unnecessary adjournment will be sought/granted. With these observations, the application stands disposed of.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:38253

¶2

Court No. - 80

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 529 BNSS No. - 488 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Sarita Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Aniruddh Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

This application under Section 529 BNSS has been filed with a prayer to direct the court concerned to decide the Case No. 286 of 2021 under Section 125 CrPC, Police Sttaion- Khuldabad, DistrictAllahabad pending in the Court of learned Family Judge, Family Court, Allahabad within stipulated period.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the aforesaid case was filed by the applicant for maintenance against her husband which is pending since 2021 and still pending. It is also submitted that though an order of interim maintenance was passed in favour of the applicant yet the same was also not complied with by the opposite party no.2 and at present no maintenance amount is being paid by the opposite party no.2 to her. It is further submitted that the applicant is in the condition of starvation for want of money.

¶9

I have considered the submissions and perused the entire record.

¶10

It appears from the record that the opposite party no.2 on one hand is not paying the interim maintenance amount to the applicant which was ordered by the Court and on the other hand he is also trying to delay the proceedings of the case on one pretext or the other.

¶11

In the circumstances, the Court concerned is directed to decide the aforesaid case in accordance with law within six months from the date of production of certified copy of this order before it, if there is no legal impediment. It is further directed that no unnecessary adjournment will be sought/granted.

¶12

With the above observations, the application stands disposed of .

¶13

Order Date :- 18.3.2025 Fhd

¶14

Digitally signed by :- FAHAD NIYAZ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sarita Devi v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarita Devi v. State of U.P. and Another

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