Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:82674 Court No. - 87 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 42463 of 2024 Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing impugned order dated 11.11.2024 passed by learned Principal Judge Family Court, Jhansi in Criminal Misc. Case No. 1178 of 2024 (CNR No. UPJS- 020024512024) (Vinay Kumar vs. Smt. Rashmi), under section 126(2) of Cr.P.C. arising out of Maintenance Case No. 909 of 2019, filed under section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Jhansi. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant no. 1 herein happens to be the husband of opposite party no. 2, due to matrimonial bickering opposite party no. 2 was thrown out of her matrimonial house. Thereafter she filed an application under section 125 Cr.P.C. for maintenance on 30.11.2019. The Principal Judge Family Court Jhansi vide order dated 02.06.2023 allowed the application and directed the applicant to pay maintenance of Rs. 12,000/- per month to the opposite party no. 2. Against which applicant had filed an application under section 126(2) Cr.P.C. against the ex- parte order passed by the Principal Judge Family Court, Jhansi. The application was allowed by the Principal Judge family court, Jhansi vide order dated 11.11.2024 with a condition that first of all applicant must pay the total amount of maintenance awarded vide order dated 02.06.2023 at the rate of Rs. 12,000/- per month till the date of this order, then only maintenance petition shall be restored to its original number and shall be heard for the claim of the opposite party no. 2 again. Said order has been assailed by the applicant by way of filing the instant application with the allegation that Principal Judge has not considered the factual aspect of the matter to the effect that opposite party no. 2 herself deserted the applicant without any sufficient reason, therefore the same is liable to be quashed. 4. Learned A.G.A. contends that there is no illegality, impropriety or infirmity in the order passed by the family Court, hence, no interference is required by this Court in the impugned order. He further pointed out that till date the applicant has not paid the maintenance amount and has preferred the instant application before this Court with sole intention to delay or avoid the payment of maintenance amount. 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. On perusal of the record, it transpires that the applicant has till date not paid a single penny to his wife/O.P. no.2 towards maintenance amount even after passed of the order dated 11.11.2024, which in my view, is just a ploy to avoid or delay payment of dues to his wife. 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 maintenance amount to the wife/O.P. no.2. 8. The instant application is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 16.5.2025 Bhanu Digitally signed by :- BHANU PRATAP KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad