Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 107025 (ALL)

USMAN v. State of U.P. AND ANOTHER

A482/38275/2024 · 2025-06-30

Anish Kumar Gupta

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:101653 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD (Sl. No.42) Court No. - 78 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 38275 of 2024 Applicant :- Usman Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajiv Sisodia Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J. 1. Heard Sri Manish Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajiv Sisodia, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and Sri S.K. Ojha, learned AGA for the State. 2. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of the order dated 29.08.2024 passed in Misc. Case No. 713 of 2022 (Usman vs. Shahana), under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C., whereby the order dated 02.03.2024 was recalled whereby the application of the applicant under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C. was allowed subject to payment of Rs. 60,000/- as cost. The applicant failed to deposit the said cost as stipulated in the order dated 02.03.2024. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the opposite party no.2 is the wife of applicant herein. Since the applicant failed to maintain the opposite party no.2, she filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. on 02.01.2017. In the said application though the applicant had filed the written statement in the year 2019, however since thereafter he did not participate in the said proceeding due to which he proceeded ex parte against the applicant under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and a final order dated 04.09.2021 was passed directing the applicant herein to pay maintenance of Rs. 3,000/- to the opposite party no.2, Rs. 3,000/- to each including her three daughters namely Shahin, Mantasha and Joya as well as well as Rs. 3,000/- to her minor son namely Arman in total Rs. 15,000/- per month from the date of filing of application i.e. 02.01.2017. Subsequent thereto an application under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C. was filed by the applicant herein seeking setting aside of the ex parte order dated 04.09.2021, which was allowed vide order dated 02.03.2024 subject to payment of cost of Rs. 20,000/- towards the compensation of delay and Rs. 40,000/- towards setting aside the ex parte order. Admittedly the said amount has never been paid by the applicant herein. Since the applicant has failed to deposit the aforesaid cost as directed vide order dated 02.03.2024, an application was moved by the opposite party no.2 to recall the order dated 02.03.2024 for non compliance of the conditions imposed in the order. In view of the aforesaid, the trial court had set aside the said order dated 02.03.2024 and affirmed the ex parte order dated 04.09.2021. Subsequent thereto an application under Section 128 Cr.P.C. filed by the opposite party no.2, the recovery warrants were issued on 29.08.2024 against the applicant herein. In compliance of the aforesaid recovery warrants, on 04.10.2024, the applicant appeared before the trial court and refused to pay any maintenance to the opposite party no.2. In view of the aforesaid, he was sent to jail for 30 days vide order dated 04.10.2024. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that an opportunity be granted to him for contesting the case and he is ready to pay the amount of award dated 04.09.2021. 5. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that more than Rs. 10 lacs is due towards the maintenance. 6. In view of the aforesaid submissions, an offer was made by the Court whether the applicant is ready and willing to deposit 50% of the amount so that he may be permitted to contest the maintenance petition on merits, the applicant refused the deposit any amount as maintenance alleging that since he has already served one month sentence for non-payment of an amount of Rs. 9,61,500/-, the said amount cannot be recovered from him. 7. In view of the aforesaid stand taken by the applicant, this Court does not find any good reason to entertain the instant application. 8. Accordingly, the instant application is dismissed. Order Date :- 1.7.2025 Ashish Pd. (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHISH PRASAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad