Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:33720 Court No. - 79 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2212 of 2025 Petitioner :- Rahul Tripathi Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Chandra Kant Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Sri Chandra Kant Tripathi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner and learned AGA for respondent no. 1-State. 2. The instant petition has been preferred with the following prayers:- "(a) set aside the impugned order dated 16.10.2020 passed by learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Basti in Case no. 1902/11/2014 (Srimati Pooja Tripathi vs. Rahul Triathi) and set aside the order dated 03.01.2025 passed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Basti in Complaint Case no. 04/11-A/19 (Pooja Tripathi vs. Rahul Tripathi), under Section 125(3) Cr.P.C., Police Station- Lalganj, District-Basti. (b) to direct the learned court below to consider the applicant's application under Section 127 Cr.P.C. on its merits and decide the application of the petitioner taking into consideration the evidence filed by the petitioner on dated 03.01.2025 before the learned court below." 3. Since the matter has been entertained only on the basis of the legal arguments raised by learned counsel for the petitioner and as such process to issue notice to respondent no. 2 is hereby dispensed with. 4. It is the case of petitioner that after getting interim maintenance vide order dated 12.02.2018 in proceeding initiated under Section 125 Cr.P.C against petitioner (husband), respondent no. 2 (wife) filed an execution case bearing no. 152/2019 for execution of interim maintenance of Rs. 27,500/-. Later on, one new fact came into the knowledge of petitioner that respondent no. 2 is rendering his services as a teacher in a school. Thereafter, petitioner filed an application under sections 125(5) and 127 of Cr.P.C. in the aforesaid execution case for exemption of petitioner from paying maintenance due to changed circumstances but the said application was rejected vide impugned order dated 03.01.2025 passed by learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Basti with cost of Rs.5,000/- which has been challenged through the instant petition. 5. It is next submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that in the impugned order dated 03.01.2025 learned court observed that the application preferred under Section 125(5) and 127 Cr.P.C. is just to harass the respondent no. 2 and if the petitioner wants the maintenance amount to be altered he may prefer a separate proceeding in that regard. 6. After hearing the rival submissions extended by learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the records, it transpires that there is hardly any illegality or infirmity involved in the order dated 03.01.2025 which impugned the present petition. The petitioner will be at liberty to prefer separate proceedings as returned with the finding recorded by learned court of Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Basti but at the same time it is made clear that the cost imposed in shape of Rs.5,000/- vide order dated 03.01.2025 shall not be given effect to and the order impugned dated 03.01.2025 is hereby set aside only to the extent so far as it imposes cost upon petitioner. Rest of the order dated 03.01.2025 shall remain intact. 7. The instant petition stands disposed of accordingly. Order Date :- 6.3.2025 Shaswat Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad