Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:53618 Court No. - 77 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 419 of 2025 Appellant :- Lalit Bansal Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Nitin Sharma,Vikash Chandra Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Manoj Bajaj,J. In Ref:- Criminal Misc. (Delay Condonation) Application The office has reported this appeal to be beyond time by 11 days. After considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for appellant and upon perusing the application for condonation of delay, it appears that sufficient cause has been shown to explain the delay in filing of the appeal and as such, the delay is condoned. The application for condonation of delay is accordingly allowed. Office to allot regular number to this appeal. Order on Appeal Appellant-Lalit Bansal has filed this appeal under Section 380 Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for setting aside the impugned order dated 17.01.2025 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Gautam Budh Nagar in Criminal Misc. Case No. 581 of 2023; titled Lalit Kumar Bansal vs. Smt. Shashi Tomar, whereby his application under Section 340 Code of Criminal Procedure alleging perjury being committed by the opposite party no. 2 has been dismissed. Learned counsel for the appellant-husbnad has argued that the wife in her application under Section 125 Code of Criminal Procedure had deliberately made wrong averments relating to the residential address of the husband-appellant, and this was done to prevent the appellant from contesting the said case. In this regard, learned counsel has drawn the attention of the Court to the para '4' of the application moved by the appellant under Section 340 Cr.P.C., and pointed out that it was specifically pleaded by the appellant that particulars of the Aadhar Card number as well as the address do not relate to the husband, but the said application has been wrongly dismissed by the trial court vide impugned order dated 17.01.2025. Learned counsel submits that once it is clear that the particulars of the Aadhar Card are incorrect, the application under Section 340 Cr.P.c. could not have been dismissed. After hearing the learned counsel and considering his submissions, this Court does not find any merit in the case, as mere mentioning a wrong Aadhar Card number or address would not be enough to change the identity of the husband. That apart, in para '6' of the said application, the wife while mentioning her particulars has given the same Aadhar Card number, which is mentioned in para '4' of the application, and it cannot be construed as a deliberate or intentional attempt on the part of the wife, much less to prevent the husband to contest the maintenance case, as it may be only an inadvertent mistake. During the course of hearing, it is not disputed by the learned counsel that the husband is contesting the claim. A perusal of the impugned order dated 17.01.2025 would show that the trial court has carefully examined the averments and the material on record while dismissing the application under Section 340 Cr.P.C. vide impugned order dated 17.01.2025. The order does not suffer from any illegality, therefore, no interference is called for by this Court in exercise of appellate jurisdiction. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed summarily. Order Date :- 11.4.2025 Brijesh Digitally signed by :- BRIJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad