HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 48868 of 2025 Court No. - 81 HON'BLE ACHAL SACHDEV, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for opposite party no.2, Sri Jhamman Ram, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. This application has been preferred by the applicant with prayer to quash the order dated 03.07.2024, passed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Court No.3, Aligarh, in Case No.1637 of 2023(Chanchal Kumari Vs. Chintu), under section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Mandrak, District Aligarh, whereby the application 16-Ka, moved by the opposite party no.2 for interim maintenance was allowed and the applicant was directed to pay Rs.4500/- per month to the opposite party no.2, from the date of application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the opposite party no.2, who is wife of the applicant has moved an application 16-Ka, in Case No.1637 of 2023(Chanchal Kumari Vs. Chintu), under section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Mandrak, District Aligarh, for interim maintenance, in the court of learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Court No.3, Aligarh, which was allowed vide impugned order dated 03.07.2024 and the applicant was directed to pay Rs.4500/- per month to the opposite party no.2, as interim maintenance, from the date of application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that trial court has allowed the application 16-Ka, moved by the opposite party no.2, wrongly Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajnish Kumar Pandey, Santosh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Ravi Pandey, Suraj Pandey Chintu @ Chintu Kumar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) and illegally without considering the material available on record. 5. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 as well as learned AGA for the State have drawn the attention of the Court to the order dated 03.07.2024, by which the applicant was directed to pay the interim maintenance amount of Rs.4500/- to the opposite party no.2, from the date of application, which has not been complied by the applicant and he filed the present application before this Court, only to delay the payment of maintenance, as awarded vide order dated 03.07.2024. 6. Perusal of record shows that the applicant has not denied his marriage with the opposite party no.2 at the time of deciding of application 16-Ka, moved by the opposite party no.2 for interim maintenance. The learned trial court has held the income of the applicant of Rs.13,120 per month and assessed him as skilled labourer. The trial court after considering the other responsibilities of the applicant granted interim maintenance of Rs.4500/- per month to the opposite party no.2, from the date of application. There is no ground to interfering with the assessment of the trial court regarding income of the applicant. 7. The applicant has failed to pay the interim maintenance of Rs.4500/- per month to the opposite party no.2, as awarded by the trial court vide impugned order dated 03.07.2025 and has filed the present application before this Court only to delay the payment of interim maintenance, The conduct of the applicant is highly objectionable and an abuse of the process of law. 8. In the aforesaid circumstances, present application moved by the applicant is liable to be dismissed. 9. Accordingly, the present application is hereby dismissed. April 21, 2026 VKG NA528 No. 48868 of 2025 2 (Achal Sachdev,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIJAY KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad