Disposed

Shourbh Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC3 Oct 2023W.P.(Cr.)/185/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition seeking quashing of an order in an enforcement case regarding maintenance, the High Court considered the pendency of the underlying maintenance case and the dispute only over arrears. The Court directed the distressed warrant to be kept in abeyance till further orders. A final hearing was scheduled before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhanbad.

What did the court decide?

Distress warrant was ordered to be kept in abeyance. Parties directed to appear before the learned court at Dhanbad.

Shourbh Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand — Maintenance and Alimony | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI

¶3

W.P.(Cr.) No. 185 of 2022

¶4

----

¶5

Shourbh Singh .... Petitioner

¶6

-- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand and Antoher .... Respondents

¶7

¶8

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

¶9

For the Petitioner	:-	Mr. Shailesh Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the State	:-	Mrs. Neha Pandey, Advocate
For the Respondent No.2	:-	Mr. Imtiyaz Khan, Advocate
		----

¶10

9 /03.10.2023 Heard Mr. Shailesh Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mrs. Neha Pandey, the learned counsel for the respondent State and Mr. Imtiyaz Khan, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no.2.

¶11

This petition has been filed for quashing of the order dated 26.03.2022 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhanbad in Enforcement Case arising out of Original Maintenance Case No.115 of 2018 and the case is pending in that learned court.

¶12

Mr. Shailesh Kumar Singh, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the order has been passed under section 125 (3) Cr.P.C. for maintenance to the tune of Rs.20,000/-. He submits that the said amount is being regularly paid by the petitioner. He submits that the only dispute is with regard to the arrears and in view of that, the distress warrant has been issued against the petitioner.

¶13

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no.2 submits that the divorce case is pending before the learned court and the entire maintenance amount has not been paid and the dispute is there. He submits that several talks have been taken place between the

¶14

¶15

parties, however, no agreement to conclude the matter has reached as yet.

¶16

In view of the above, it appears that the petitioner has not challenged the maintenance order passed under section 125(3) Cr.P.C and the matter has been filed for compliance of the order by way of filing enforcement case under section 128 Cr.P.C.

¶17

In view of the pendency of the case and considering the submission of the learned counsels for the parties, if there is any chance of compromise, the same can be considered by the learned court where the case is pending.

¶18

In view of that and also considering that the dispute is only with regard to the arrears which is being disputed by the learned counsel for the respondent no.2 and it has been submitted that the current amount is being paid to the respondent no.2, the distress warrant issued against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance and both the parties are directed to appear before the learned court at Dhanbad on or before 16.10.2023.

¶19

With above observation and direction, W.P.(Cr.) No.185 of 2022 is disposed of.

¶20

Pending petition, if any, also stands disposed of accordingly.

¶21

( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

¶22

SI/,

Shourbh Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shourbh Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

MD Zafiruddin Vs the State of Jharkhand through Vigilance

Madhu Mahto Alias Madhu Mahato Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ravi Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ajit Gulabchand Vs the State of Jharkhand

Raja Bhadra Vs the State of Jharkhand and Another

Ms Telco Club Through Its Manager Ryan Troy Xavier Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.