Allahabad High Court
Rajesh Yadav vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 2 February, 2024
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:18250
Court No. - 91
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 46826 of 2023
Applicant :- Rajesh Yadav
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Kumar Singh,B.N.Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.
Present application under Section 482 of Cr PC has been filed by the applicant, praying for quashing the order dated 4.11.2023 passed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Court No.4, Kanpur Nagar in Case No.2382 of 2022 (Smt. Sarita Yadav and another vs. Rajesh Yadav), under Section 125 of Cr PC, Police Station Kalyanpur, District Kanpur Nagar.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that an application for maintenance under Section 125 of Cr PC was filed by opposite party no.2 on 22.11.2022. The interim maintenance was granted, vide impugned order dated 4.11.2023 to the tune of Rs.6000/- per month (Rs.4000/- to opposite party no.2 and Rs.2000/- to her daughter) from the date of submitting Proforma Affidavit No.5, i.e. 22.11.2022, while the interim maintenance can only be granted from the date of presentation of application for interim maintenance. He further submitted that the applicant is regularly paying Rs.6000/- from the date of impugned order.
Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer and submitted that interim maintenance has been granted from 22.11.2022, the date on which the application under Section 125 of Cr PC was filed.
The only argument put forth by learned counsel for the applicant is that the application for interim maintenance was moved by opposite party no.2 on 16.3.2023 and, therefore, interim maintenance could have been granted from 16.3.2023. The Apex Court in Rajnesh v. Neha and another, AIR 2021 SC 569 observed as under:
"The rationale of granting maintenance from the date of application finds its roots in the object of enacting maintenance legislation, so as to enable the wife to overcome the financial crunch which occurs on separation from the husband. Financial constraints of a dependent spouse hampers their capacity to be effectively represented before the Court. In order to prevent a dependant from being reduced to destitution, it is necessary that maintenance is awarded from the date on which the application for maintenance is filed before the concerned Court."
Further, the Hon'ble Apex Court made it clear in Part-B-IV of the above judgment that the award of maintenance from the date of filing of application for maintenance is justified.
In view of the mandate given by Hon'ble Apex Court, it is clear that the interim maintenance application is normally moved after filing the main application under Section 125 of Cr PC and, therefore, granting interim maintenance from the date of application is justified. It appears that in the impugned order, the words "from the date of filing proforma 5 with affidavit" were mentioned by typographical mistake. Such proforma was filed by the complainant on 22.11.2022, while the application under Section 125 of Cr PC was also filed on 22.11.2022.
In view of above, no case is made out. Present application is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 2.2.2024
RKK/-
