Ram Gopal vs. Vidya Devi Cr. MP No. 140 of 2025 in Cr. MMO No. 109 of 2022 Reserved on: 1.9.2025 12.9.2025 Present: Mr. Mohar Singh, Advocate, for the applicant/ petitioner. Mr. Sparsh Bhushan, Advocate, for the non- applicant/respondent. Cr. MP No. 140 of 2025 The applicant/husband has filed the present application for the release of the amount lying deposited in the Registry of this Court. It has been asserted that the applicant filed a petition before this Court against the order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sirmour, District at Nahan. The matter was listed before this Court on 21.4.2022, and the order dated 23.11.2020 was stayed, subject to the deposit of ₹5,000/- in the Registry of this Court on or before the 10th day of every month. The applicant deposited ₹1,90,000/- in the Registry of this Court of which ₹40,000/- was released in favour of the respondent/wife on 27.3.2023. An amount of ₹75,000/- was also released in favour of the respondent/wife on 18.11.2024. An amount of ₹75,000/- is lying deposited in the Registry of the Court., Total arrears of maintenance were ₹2,85,000/- till 3.5.2024, and a warrant of attachment of salary was issued. An amount of ₹40,000/- was transferred to the account of the respondent/wife vide Annexure A-2. ₹2,40,000/- had been deducted from the applicant’s salary. The applicant has paid total arrears of ₹3,55,000/-, whereas ₹2,85,000/- were due in May 2024. Therefore, the applicant/husband is entitled to get ₹75,000/- lying deposited with the Registry of this Court. 2. The application is opposed by filing a reply taking preliminary submissions regarding the applicant having suppressed material facts from the Court. The contents of the application were denied on merits. It was asserted that the total amount of maintenance from 5.6.2013 till 6.5.2020 comes to ₹4,10,000/-. An amount of ₹2,65,000/- is due from June 2020 till October 2024. A total amount of ₹6,75,000/- was due. Therefore, it was prayed that the present application be dismissed. 3. A rejoinder denying the contents of the reply and affirming those of the application was filed. 4. I have heard Mr. Mohar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant/husband and Mr. Sparsh Bhushan, learned counsel for the non-applicant/respondent. 5. Mr. Mohar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant/husband, submitted that the applicant has paid an excess amount to the non-applicant/respondent; therefore, he is entitled to the money deposited in the Court. Hence, he prayed that the present application be allowed and the amount be released to the applicant/husband. 6. Mr. Sparsh Bhushan, learned counsel for the non- applicant/wife, submitted that an amount of ₹6,75,000/- was due till October 2024. The applicant has not paid the whole amount; therefore, he prayed that the present application be dismissed. 7. I have given considerable thought to the submissions made at the bar and have gone through the records carefully. 8. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate held on 8.5.2020 that an amount of ₹4,10,000/- was due upto 6.5.2020. Hence, a warrant of attachment was ordered to be issued to the Drawing and Disbursing Officer (DDO) for deducting and remitting the amount to the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. This order was assailed before this Court, and the order was upheld. Therefore, the plea taken in the application that an amount of ₹2,85,000/- was due till 3.5.2024 and the applicant has paid ₹3,55,000/- is contrary to this order. The order mentioned that an amount of ₹4,10,000/- was due till May 2020. Once the petition against this order was dismissed, the applicant became liable to pay the amount. There is no averment in the application that the applicant has paid the amount. Hence, the plea that he is entitled to the amount of ₹75,000/- lying deposited in the Registry of this Court is not acceptable. 9. Consequently, the application for the release of the amount filed by the applicant/husband is ordered to be dismissed. The amount of ₹75,000/- lying deposited in the Registry of this Court is ordered to be remitted to the respondent/wife on furnishing of the details of the bank account, if not furnished earlier. The application stands disposed of. (Rakesh Kainthla) Judge 12th September, 2025 (Chander)