Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:62481 Court No. - 87 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 32481 of 2024 Applicant :- Narendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shailesh Singh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard Shri Shailesh Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Jyoti Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State. 2. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of impugned order dated 03.04.2024 passed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Court no.3, Ghaziabad in Misc. Case No.537 of 2022 (Jyoti v. Narendra Kumar), under Section 125 Cr.P.C. as well as exparte order dated 10.05.2022 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Ghaziabad in Criminal Case No.853 of 2020, P.S.Indirapuram, District Ghaziabad. 3. Facts which emerge from the record are that the applicant was married to opposite party no.2 according to Hindu Customs and Rites on 10.02.2020, thereafter, due to matrimonial discord she has left her matrimonial house and filed maintenance case under Section 125 Cr.P.C. in which the Court concerned vide order dated 10.05.2022 has awarded Rs.5000/- per month as maintenance to opposite party no.2, but the applicant did not comply with the said order, therefore, she has filed the Misc. Case No.537 of 2022, under Section 125(3) Cr.P.C. seeking recovery of said amount from the applicant wherein the Court concerned vide order dated 03.04.2024 issued recovery warrant against the applicant. Both the impugned orders are under challenge by means of instant application. 4. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the maintenance awarded by the Court concerned is excessive and the applicant is not in position to pay the same. He further submits that the impugned order dated 10.05.2022 is an exparte order as the same has been passed without hearing the applicant. He also submits that opposite party no.2 has herself left her matrimonial house and thereafter, filed an application for maintenance which has been allowed by the Court concerned in the absence of the applicant. He also submits that both the impugned orders are liable to be quashed. 5. Learned AGA submits that the wife is ready to stay with the applicant but the applicant is not ready to accept her neither he is ready to pay the maintenance. 6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, this Court is of the view that the impugned orders passed by the Court concerned are justified as the applicant has deliberately avoided the Court proceeding and still instead of paying the same chose to file the instant application. 7. I see no reason to interfere in the order passed by the Court concerned. The instant application is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 23.4.2025 S.P. Digitally signed by :- SANJAY PURI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad