Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 108538 (ALL)

VIKAS GIRI v. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

A482/40970/2024 · 2025-07-07

Anish Kumar Gupta

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:107230 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ***** (SL No.8) Court No. - 78 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 40970 of 2024 Applicant :- Vikas Giri Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Dilip Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sunil Kumar Dwivedi Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J. 1. List revised. None appears for the applicant to press the instant application. Sri Sunil Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Rajesh Kumar Gupta, learned A.G.A. for the State are present. 2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of the impugned order dated 10.10.2024 passed in Case No. 479 of 2024 (Vandana Giri vs. Vikas Giri) under Sections 125(3) Cr.P.C. as well as the ex-parte order dated 02.05.2024 passed in Criminal Case No. 208 of 2023 (Vandana Giri vs. Vikas Giri) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., P.S.- Gadwar, District- Ballia. 3. The opposite parties no.2 and 3 are the wife and daughter of the applicant herein respectively. They had filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. seeking maintenance from the applicant herein. The said application has been allowed vide ex-parte order dated 02.05.2024 and awarded maintenance to the opposite party no.2 at the rate of Rs. 2,500/- and Rs. 1,000/- i.e., total Rs. 3,500/- per month. After the aforesaid order, the opposite party no.2 has also filed an application under Section 125 (3) Cr.P.C., seeking recovery of the amount so awarded by the learned trial court from the applicant herein. 4. Therefore, by way of instant application the applicant has challenged the ex-parte order granting maintenance to the opposite parties. In the entire application it is not denied by the applicant that the opposite parties no.2 and 3 are the wife and daughter of the applicant. 5. In view thereof, looking at the meager amount of maintenance awarded by the trial court this Court does not find any good reason to entertain the instant application, specifically when no one is present to press the instant application. 6. In view thereof, the instant application is dismissed. Order Date :- 8.7.2025 Shubham Arya (Anish Kumar Gupta, J.) Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM ARYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad