Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:29374 Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 6836 of 2025 Applicant :- Mithlesh Yadav Alias Monu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Jagat Narayan Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application under Section - 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed with the following prayer :- "It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to quash the impugned order dated 15.02.2023, passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Gorakhpur in Case No. 627 of 2018, under Section - 125 of Cr.P.C. (Paramsheela Vs. Mithilesh Yadav @ Monu) as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 562 of 2023, arising out of Case No. 627 of 2018, under Section - 128 Cr.P.C. (Paramsheela Versus. Mithilesh Yadav @ Monu). It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to stay the effect of the impugned order dated 15.02.2023, passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Gorakhpur in Case No. 627 of 2018, under Section - 125 of Cr.P.C. (Paramsheela Versus. Mithilesh Yadav @ Monu) during the pendency of the present application before this Hon'ble Court otherwise the applicant shall suffer irreparable loss and injury." 3. So far the impugned order dated 15.02.2023 is concerned, by that order maintenance has been granted by the Family Court concerned under Section - 125 Cr.P.C. in favour of opposite party no.2. In view of the provisions of Section 19 of Family Court Act, 1984 and the law laid down in case of Smt. Anjana Mukhopadhyay Vs. State of U.P. and Another 2023:AHC:2129445, Ashu Jain Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others 2023:AHC:165660 and Manish Aggarwal Vs. Seema Aggarwal and Others 2012 SCC OnLine Del 4816, it is clear that an order of maintenance or interim maintenance passed by Family court is not an interlocutory order and that against such orders, aggrieved person has remedy of revision. It was held that against such order, application under Section - 528 B.N.S.S. is not maintainable. Similar law has been laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in case of Liaqat Hussain Vs. Jainab Praveen and Another AIRONLINE 2020 ALL 2497. 4. Thus, it is apparent that this application under Section - 528 B.N.S.S. against impugned order dated 15.02.2023 is not maintainable. Hence, this application under Section - 528 B.N.S.S. against the impugned order dated 15.02.2023 is dismissed as not maintainable. The applicant would be at liberty to file revision or resort to appropriate remedy against that order, in accordance with law . 5. So far the prayer of quashing of proceedings under Section - 128 Cr.P.C. is concerned, it appears that the opposite party no.2 was granted maintenance vide order dated 15.02.2023. As the amount of maintenance was not paid, the opposite party no.2 has initiated proceedings under Section - 128 Cr.P.C.. Considering facts of the matter, no case for quashing of proceedings under Section - 128 Cr.P.C. is made out. 6. However, it is directed that in case applicant moves an application before the Family Court concerned within a period of two weeks from today to pay the arrears of maintenance in installments, the same shall be considered and decided by the Family Court concerned expeditiously in accordance with law. 7. The application u/s - 528 B.N.S.S. is disposed of in above terms. Order Date :- 3.3.2025 S Rawat Digitally signed by :- SHOBHIT RAWAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad