Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:75131 Court No. - 87 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 34627 of 2024 Applicant :- Madhur Khunger Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mahendra Bahadur Singh,Shashank Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard Sri Shashank Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jyoti Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State-O.P. no.1, the opposite party no.2 in person and perused the record. 2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been filed by the applicant praying for quashing impugned Recovery Warrant dated 12.03.2024 passed by the Court of Additional Principal Judge, Family Court No.1, Varanasi in case no.1297 of 2022, under section 128 Cr.P.C., P.S. Chetganj, District Varanasi. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant happens to be the husband of opposite party no.2, and because of matrimonial discord, opposite party no.2 left her matrimonial house and initiated proceeding under section 125 Cr.P.C. in which the Court below vide order dated 18.07.2019 awarded maintenance of Rs.12,000/- per month to opposite party no.2, thereafter, opposite party no.2 initiated proceeding under section 128 Cr.P.C. for execution of order dated 18.07.2019 in which recovery warrants have been issued. He further submits that the financial status of applicant is not so sound and the maintenance amount awarded by the court below is on higher side. In the aforesaid backdrop, he submitted that the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the application and contends that the Court below has awarded maintenance of Rs.12,000/- per month to the wife, which is considerably meager amount for the said purpose, hence, no interference is required by this Court in the impugned orders. 5.To buttress his argument, learned A.G.A. has placed reliance on a judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bhuwan Mohan Singh vs Meena & Ors, AIR 2014 Supreme Court 2875 wherein the Court has held that Section 125 Cr.P.C. was conceived to ensure that a woman, who has left or thrown out of matrimonial house, can sustain herself and her children. The Court further held that concept of sustenance does not necessarily mean "to lead the life of an animal", rather the wife would be entitled in law to lead a life in the similar manner as she would have lived in the house of her husband. 6. In the case in hand, on perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the trial court had directed the applicant to pay the maintenance amount of Rs.12,000/- per month to the wife regularly but the applicant instead of paying the same has filed the instant application against recovery warrant. Even the arrears of maintenance are also due upon the applicant. 7. In view of aforesaid proposition of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court and the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that filing of this application is nothing but pure abuse of process of law and there is no merit in this application as the same has been filed just to delay the payment of dues to the wife. 8. The instant application is, accordingly, dismissed. 9. However, as opposite party no.2 submits that the maintenance of Rs.12,000/- per month was awarded to her by the Court below from the date of order i.e. 18.07.2019 but till date nothing has been paid by the applicant, therefore, it is directed that the outstanding amount be recovered from the applicant as arrears of land revenue. The opposite party no.2 further submits that the execution proceeding are held up as the father of the applicant refused to accept notice on the ground that the applicant does not stay on the given address. Learned counsel for the applicant is directed to provide present address of the applicant to opposite party no.2 within two weeks so that the recovery proceeding can be initiated against him. Order Date :- 8.5.2025 S.P. Digitally signed by :- SANJAY PURI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad