Allahabad High Court
Nagendra Kumar vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home ... on 24 May, 2024
Author: Shamim Ahmed
Bench: Shamim Ahmed
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:39496
Court No. - 27
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4772 of 2024
Applicant :- Nagendra Kumar
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko. And Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.
1. Heard Shri Arun Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Bhaskar Mal, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party as well as perused the record.
2. This application has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by the applicant seeking quashing of the order dated 19.04.2024 passed by learned Court of Principal Judge, Family Court II, Pratapgarh in Execution Case No.942 of 2022; Indramati vs. Nagendra under Section 128 Cr.P.C., Police Station-Lalganj, District-Pratapgarh as well as recovery warrant of Rs.6,56,000/- dated 29.01.2024 has been issued against the applicant for realization of maintenance amount in compliance of the judgment/order dated 22.09.2022 passed by Additional Principal Judge Family Court I, Pratapgarh in Criminal Case No.08 of 2012; Indramati and Another vs. Nagendra Kumar @ Pappu filed under Section 125 Cr.P.C.
3. Submission made by the counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is a very poor person having a general store and he is not in a position to pay the recovery amount to the opposite party No.3 and he has been unable to pay Rs. 4000/- per month to the opposite party No.3 and 4, who are his wife and son respectively. He further submitted that the family court has not considered that the opposite party no.3 (wife) is living separately from the applicant without any reasonable reason so she is not liable to get any maintenance from the applicant. After recording the statements of the contesting parties, without considering the facts and evidence on record allowed the application of the opposite party no.3 and awarded Rs. 3000/- per month to the wife-opposite party No.3 and Rs. 1000/- per month to the son of the applicant-opposite party No.4 from the date of the application.
4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. stated that the family court passed the impugned order after considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the statements of the applicant and opposite party no.3, in such circumstances to meet the ends of justice, the impugned order does not require any interference. There is no illegality, impropriety and incorrectness in the impugned order and also there seems to be no abuse of court's process.
5. I have heard learned A.G.A., learned Counsel for the applicant and perused the material placed on record.
6. Counsel for the applicant is unable to point out any such illegality or impropriety or incorrectness in the impugned order which may persuade this Court to interfere in the same. The amount fixed for maintenance was Rs. 3000/- per month to the wife-opposite party No.3 and Rs. 1000/- per month to the son of the applicant-opposite party No.4, which in the present days of high price rise cannot be said to be either excessive or disproportionate. The provisions of Section 125 of Cr.P.C are beneficial provisions which are enacted to stop the vagrancy of a destitute wife and provide some succor to them, who are entitled to get the maintenance which has been wrongly denied. The fact that the applicant is the husband of opposite party No.3 and father of opposite party No.4 has not been denied and till date the applicant has not paid a single penny to his wife and son.
7. In such circumstances to meet the ends of justice, the impugned order does not require any interference. There is no illegality, impropriety and incorrectness in the impugned order and also there seems to be no abuse of court's process.
8. In view of the above, this application lacks merit and stands rejected.
9. Further, the concerned Family Court is directed to recover the entire amount from the applicant within one month from today in accordance with law and pay the same to the opposite party No.3 and 4.
Order Date :- 24.5.2024
Piyush/-
