Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:82530 Court No. - 87 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 37087 of 2024 Applicant :- Shashwat Jain Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Deepak Kumar Pandey,Rohit Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- Shivam Singh,G.A. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard Sri Rohit Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shashidhar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State-O.P. no.1, Sri Shivam Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and perused the record. 2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been filed by the applicant praying for quashing impugned order dated 12.09.2024 passed in Execution Case No.42 of 2023, under Section 125 (3) Cr.P.C., pending int he Court of Additional Principal Judge, Court No.6, Ghaziabad. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that marriage of the applicant was solemnized with O.P. no.2 on 08.11.2014 but due to matrimonial discord, the wife left the matrimonial house and filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. wherein vide order dated 05.12.2022 the applicant has been directed to pay Rs.40,000/- per month from the date of application, thereafter, opposite party no.2 has filed a case under Section 125(3) Cr.P.C. for execution of order dated 05.12.2024 and the Court concerned vide impugned order has issued recovery warrants against the applicant, which is under challenge by means of this application. He further submitted 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 order passed by the court below is justified, 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.40,000/- per month to the wife regularly but the applicant did not comply with the said order, hence, the Court concerned has issued recovery warrants. 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. Order Date :- 17.5.2025 S.P. Digitally signed by :- SANJAY PURI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad