Allahabad High Court
Lav Kumar vs State Of U.P. And Another on 18 July, 2023
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:142640
Court No. - 88
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 24289 of 2023
Applicant :- Lav Kumar
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
1-Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P./opposite party no. 1 and perused the record.
2-The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the applicant against the order dated 01.05.2023 passed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court No. 1, Muzaffarnagar in Case No. 108/11 of 2021 (Smt. Swati vs. Lav Kumar), in a proceeding under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Khatauli, District Muzaffarnagar, whereby the applicant has been directed to pay Rs. 5000/- per month as an interim maintenance to the opposite party no. 2 before the 10th day of each month from the date of moving application by the opposite party no.2. So far as arrears is concerned, it is directed that the same shall be paid in four quarterly instalments.
3-The main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is ready to keep his wife with him. False allegations have been levelled by her in her application. After marriage, the behaviour of opposite party no.2 was very bad. She used to talk with one Ankit Jagwal and on imposing restriction by the applicant, she left her matrimonial home without any valid reason and is living in relationship with Ankit Jagwal, therefore, she is not entitled for interim maintenance.
4-On the other hand, learned A.G.A. refuting the said submission, pointed out that opposite party no. 2 has moved an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. alleging inter-alia that her father had spent about Rs. 35 lac in her marriage and sufficient house hold articles were also given but the applicant and his family members were not satisfied with the dowry and there was consistent additional demand of Rs. 10 lac. On 26.10.2020, she was beaten and thrown out of her matrimonial home. She has also stated that the applicant and her in-laws tried to kill her and with regard to said incident, she has also lodged First Information Report against them, which was registered at Case Crime No. 11 of 2021, under Sections 307, 323, 504, 506 498-A I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act. It is also pointed out that the applicant has also filed a suit under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act for divorce. The opposite party no.2 in her application dated 12.07.2022 (Paper no.30 Ga) has claimed Rs. 20,000/-per month towards interim maintenance, but the Family Court has awarded Rs. 5000/-only, which can not be said to be excessive in present scenario.
5-Having heard the submission of learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, I find that the opposite party no. 2 moved an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. in the year 2021, in which an application seeking interim maintenance was filed on 12.07.2022 but till date no amount towards interim maintenance has been paid by the applicant to opposite party no. 2, whereas it is not disputed that opposite party no.2 is legally wedded wife of the applicant. The applicant is advocate by profession. The applicant being husband is bound to maintain his wife/ opposite party no2 with all dignity and standard of living, as she was accustomed to in her matrimonial home. The fundamental principle behind the provisions under Section 125 Cr.P.C. is for amelioration and financial status of affairs as well as mental agony and anguish that women suffers when she is compelled to leave her matrimonial home. If the husband is healthy, able bodied and is in a position to maintain himself, he is under legal obligation to support his wife. The Amendment Act 2001 introduced an express provision for grant of "interim maintenance" under section 125 Cr.P.C. and power has been vested to the concerned Court to order for making a monthly allowance towards interim maintenance during pendency of the petition under section 125 Cr.P.C. The third proviso to section 125 Cr.P.C. (inserted vide Act 50 of 2001 w.e.f. 24.09.2001) provides that the proceeding for interim maintenance, shall as for as possible, be disposed of within 60 days from the date of service of notice on the contesting spouse. The interim maintenance is generally granted taking into the consideration the status of the parties and capacity of the spouse to pay the maintenance. I also find that the Family Court has passed the order dated 01.05.2023 granting interim maintenance Rs. 5,000/- to the opposite party no. 2 in the light of judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Rajnesh vs. Neha and another, (2021) 2 SCC 324, therefore, I do not find any illegality in the impugned order dated 01.05.2023 and the same is not liable to be interfered with. The relief as sought by the applicant is not liable to be allowed.
6-This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.
7-Office is directed to communicate copy of this order to the concerned court below as well as the opposite party no. 2 within two weeks.
Order Date :- 18.7.2023
Saurabh
