Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:77772 Court No. - 87 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 43323 of 2024 Applicant :- Amit Kumar Maurya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Tripathi,Sanjiv Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard Sri Anil Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sanjiv Maurya, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the record. 2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant seeking quashing of the proceedings of Maintenance Case No. 517 of 2022 (Priyanka Maurya vs. Amit Kumar Maurya), pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhadohi-Gyanpur as well as recovery certificate dated 17- 10-2024. 3. Briefly stated, the applicant married opposite party no. 2 (Priyanka Maurya) on 07.12.2020 in accordance with Hindu rites and customs. It is alleged that on 19.06.2021, opposite party no. 2 was subjected to cruelty and physical assault and was forcefully dropped at her parental home after being dispossessed of her jewellery, with further threats issued to prevent her return. Subsequently, opposite party no. 2 filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C., and on 03.09.2024, the learned trial court, upon due consideration of the facts and submissions, allowed her interim maintenance application and awarded a sum of 8,000/- ₹ per month from the date of the application, i.e., 24.07.2023. It is also on record that opposite party no. 2 lodged an F.I.R. on 19.09.2023, registered as Crime No. 13 of 2023, under Sections 498A, 323, and 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act at Police Station – Mahila Thana, District Bhadohi, in which the applicant is currently on bail. Furthermore, opposite party no. 2 instituted proceedings under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, being Case No. 467 of 2023, on 20.04.2023 before the Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Fast Track Court, Bhadohi. 4. When the matter was listed before this Court on 24.04.2025, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was willing to deposit the entire outstanding amount of interim maintenance within two weeks. On that submission, the matter was adjourned to 13.05.2025. However, today, when the matter is taken up, there is nothing on record to show that the applicant has complied with the said undertaking. 5. Sri Amit Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2, opposed the application and submitted that opposite party no. 2 has no independent source of income and is forced to live at her parental house. It was further argued that the applicant, while falsely claiming financial hardship, has deliberately avoided compliance with the trial court’s order despite having sufficient means to maintain his wife. The interim maintenance of 8,000/- ₹ granted by the Family Court was based on proper appreciation of the facts, and does not warrant interference under the inherent jurisdiction of this Court. 6. Having heard the rival submissions and upon perusal of the record, including the impugned order, this Court finds that the court below has considered all relevant aspects of the case, including the financial condition of both parties and the submissions made on their behalf. The order awarding interim maintenance cannot be said to be arbitrary or passed without application of judicial mind. This Court is not inclined to interfere with the interim maintenance order. 7. Accordingly, the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. stands dismissed. Order Date :- 13.5.2025 pks Digitally signed by :- PANKAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad