Parvez Ahmad Khan vs State Of U.P. And Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 37620 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Parvez Ahmad Khan vs State Of U.P. And Another on 14 November, 2024

Author: Saurabh Srivastava

Bench: Saurabh Srivastava

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:179636
 
Court No. - 85
 

 
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 7512 of 2024
 

 
Petitioner :- Parvez Ahmad Khan
 
Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- R.K.Paramhans Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Rajendra Prasad
 

 
Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.
 

1. Rejoinder affidavit preferred on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record.

2. Heard Sri R.K.Paramhans Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Ashutosh Kumar Pandey holding brief of Sri Rajendra Prasad, learned counsel for respondent no. 2 and learned AGA for the State.

3. Present petition has been preferred with the following prayers:-

"A. to allow the petition and set aside the judgment and order dated 12.01.2024 (Annexure no. 9) passed by Session Judge, Azamgarh in Criminal Appeal No. 10000100/2022 (UPAZ010083912022), (Parvez Ahmad Khan vs. State of U.P. & another) and also set aside the judgement and order dated 13.09.2022 (Annexure no.7) passed by Judicial Magistrate/F.T.C.(Women), Azamgarh in Misc. Case no. 614 of 2020, under Section 12 of Domestic Violence & Women Protection Act, 2005, Police Station- Maharajganj, District- Azamgarh (Nikhat Khan vs. Parvez Ahmad Khan)."

4. It is the case of the petitioner that vide ex parte order dated 13.09.2022, learned Judicial Magistrate/F.T.C.(Women), Azamgarh passed in Misc. Case no. 614 of 2020 filed under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence & Women Protection Act, 2005 by respondent no. 2 (wife of petitioner), directed petitioner to pay Rs.60,000/- to respondent no. 2 within five months. Against the order dated 13.09.2022, petitioner filed a criminal appeal bearing no. 100 of 2022 but the same was also rejected vide order dated 12.01.2024 passed by learned Session Judge, Azamgarh.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner challenged the impugned orders on the grounds that petitioner is a labour and is very poor person hence it is not possible for him to comply with the order impugned through the instant petition. It is also submitted that against the petitioner, two orders for maintenance have been passed one is under Section 125 of Cr.P.C, passed on dated 8.4.2024 by learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court no. 1, Azamgarh (annexed as Annexure no. 5 to the petition) and other one under Section 23 of the Domestic Violence Act which is not sustainable in the eye of law. Moreover, respondent no. 2 is working as a teacher in a private school and is earning a handsome amount.

6. Sri Ashutosh Kumar Pandey holding brief of Sri Rajendra Prasad, learned counsel for respondent no. 2 and learned AGA for the State vehemently opposed the prayer sought through the instant appeal but could not dispute the aforesaid grounds raised by learned counsel for petitioner.

7. After hearing the rival submissions extended by learned counsels for the parties, perusing the records and considering the grounds raised through the instant petition, amount of compensation awarded vide order dated 13.09.2022 to respondent no. 2 is hereby modified to the tune of Rs.30,000/- only. Rest of the order and direction which has been upheld by the appellate authority vide order dated 12.01.2024 shall remain same.

8. The instant petition stands disposed of accordingly.

Order Date :- 14.11.2024

Shaswat