Allahabad High Court
Bhoora @ Netrapal vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 23 May, 2023
Bench: Samit Gopal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:113436
Court No. - 71
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19094 of 2023
Applicant :- Bhoora @ Netrapal
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Kamlesh Kumar Dwivedi,Saurabh Dwivedi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
List revised.
Heard Sri Kamlesh Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Raj Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Bhoora @ Netrapal with the prayer to allow this application and quash the order dated 10.08.2021 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Agra as well as proceedings of recovery warrant in pursuance of order dated 05.04.2022 in Misc. Criminal Case No. 1019 of 2021 (Smt. Geeta versus Bhoora), under Section 125(3) Cr.P.C., Police Station New Agra, District Agra, pending in the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Agra and with a further prayer to stay further proceeding of the aforesaid case.
The facts of the present case are that the applicant is the husband of opposite party no. 2. The opposite party no. 2 moved an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. claiming maintenance for herself and her minor daughter. The said case was decided vide judgment and order dated 21.09.2019 whereby the Court concerned awarded Rs. 4,000/- per month to opposite party no. 2 and Rs. 3,000/- per month to the opposite party no.3 from the date of the order as maintenance till the major of her minor daughter. It is argued that as awarded maintenance is too excessive. Thereafter opposite party no. 2 and 3 filed an application under Section 125(3) Cr.P.C. after which warrant for recovery of Rs. 1,61,000/- was issued on 10.08.2021 against which he filed the present application.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that he he could not deposit the said amount as ordered to be paid to opposite party no. 2 within time. It is argued while placing para 11 of the affidavit that at the present time, the recovery amount is of Rs. 2,03,000/-. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is not challenging the order impugned dated 21.09.2019 on merits but only confines his prayer to the effect that he may be permitted to deposit arrears of maintenance within a period of three months from today. It is argued that the applicant shall abide by the judgment and order dated 21.09.2019.
Learned counsel for the State has also been heard.
In view of the above, the prayer for quashing of proceedings is dismissed as not pressed.
After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record and also considering the fact that the applicant is not challenging the order dated 21.09.2019 on merits but only confines his prayer to afford him an opportunity to deposit the amount of arrears of maintenance within a period of two months, it is provided that if the applicant files an application along with affidavit within ten days from today before the Court concerned giving undertaking that he shall pay the arrears of maintenance in two equal monthly installments, he shall be permitted to pay the arrears of maintenance within two equal installments subject to the condition that he shall continue to pay the regular amount of maintenance as has been ordered by the Family Court, no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicant.
The applicant shall comply with the said order within the said time failing which the court concerned may proceed in accordance with law against him.
The applicant stands disposed of with the aforesaid direction.
Order Date :- 23.5.2023
M. ARIF
(Samit Gopal, J.)
