Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:30216 Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 6989 of 2025 Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sakshi Jaiswal,Vimal Kumar Pandey 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 material brought on record. 2. This application under Section - 528 BNSS has been preferred against order dated 01.01.2025, passed by learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Gautam Buddh Nagar, in Case No. 76 of 2022 (Smt. Anjana Somvanshi and Others vs. Rajesh Kumar), under Section 125 Cr.P.C., P.S.- Mahila Thana, District- Gautam Buddh Nagar, whereby interim maintenance has been granted in favour of opposite party nos.2, 3 & 4. 3. Regarding maintainability of this application under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred as B.N.S.S.), learned counsel for the applicant submitted that by impugned order interim maintenance has been granted and thus this application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is maintainable. It is further submitted that revision against impugned order is not maintainable, hence applicant has no other remedy. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that this application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is not maintainable. 5. By impugned order dated 01.01.2025 interim maintenance has been granted by the Family Court concerned under Section - 125 Cr.P.C. in favour of opposite party nos.2. 3 & 4. 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 - 482 Cr.P.C. 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. In B.N.S.S. the equivalent provisions to Section 482 Cr.P.C. 1973, has been enshrined in Section 528 B.N.S.S. and thus similar analogy would be applicable to the application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. 6. Thus, it is apparent that this application under Section - 528 B.N.S.S. against impugned order dated 01.01.2025 is not maintainable. 7. Accordingly, this application under Section - 528 B.N.S.S. is dismissed as not maintainable. 8. However, the applicant would be at liberty to file criminal revision or to resort remedy available under law. The certified copies available on record may be returned back to learned counsel for applicant after retaining photocopy of same on record. Order Date :- 4.3.2025 'SP'/- Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad