Allahabad High Court
Sachin Sharma vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 2 February, 2024
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:18673
Court No. - 92
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 37603 of 2023
Applicant :- Sachin Sharma
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Rohit Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.
1. Heard Sri Rohit Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sudhir Kumar Chandraul, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.
2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant praying for setting aside the impugned judgement and order dated 18.08.2023 passed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Mathura in Case No.462 of 2019 (Smt. Madhuri Sharma Vs. Sachin Sharma), under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Govind Nagar, District Mathura including the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the matrimonial dispute the wife has filed an application under 125 Cr.P.C. in which interim maintenance of Rs.12,000/- has been granted by the family court vide order dated 18.08.2023. ignoring the fact that the wife/opposite party no.2 is already getting maintenance of Rs.18,000/- per month under Section 23 of Domestic Violence, 2005. He further submits that the applicant is being forced to pay double maintenance by the impugned order. He further submits that the family Court has utterly failed to consider that the opposite party no.2 is already getting maintenance.
4. In support of his argument, learned counsel for the applicant cited judgements of Bombay High Court in Sanjay v. Swati reported in 2006 DMC 731 Bombay wherein it has been held that the husband could not be held liable to pay maintenance from both proceedings simultaneously. He further cited another judgement of Bombay High Court in Vishal v. Aparna and another reported in 2018 SCC OnLine Bom. 1207 wherein it has been held that even though proceeding under the Domestic Violence Act may be an independent proceeding, the Magistrate cannot ignore the maintenance awarded in any other legal proceedings, while determining whether over and above the maintenance already awarded, any further amount was required to be granted for reasons to be recorded. He also cited a judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in Rajnesh v. Neha reported in (2017) SCC OnLine 15484 wherein it has been held that though the wife can simultaneously claim maintenance under the different enactments, it does not in any way mean that the husband can be made liable to pay the maintenance awarded in each of the said proceedings. It was further held that while determining the quantum of maintenance awarded under Section 125 Cr.P.C., the Magistrate would take into consideration the interim maintenance awarded to the aggrieved woman under the Domestic Violence Act.
5. Matter requires consideration.
6. Learned AGA accepted notice on behalf of the State.
7. Issue notice to opposite party no.2 returnable at an early date. Steps be taken within a week.
8. Learned AGA as well as opposite party no.2 may file counter affidavit within four weeks. Two weeks, thereafter, to the applicant to file rejoinder affidavit.
9. List this matter on 05.04.2024.
10. Till the next date of listing, impugned order dated 18.08.2023 passed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Mathura in Case No.462 of 2019 (Smt. Madhuri Sharma Vs. Sachin Sharma), under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Govind Nagar, District Mathura shall be kept in abeyance.
Order Date :- 2.2.2024
S.P.
