Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:110464 Court No. - 79 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10679 of 2015 Applicant :- Mujeeb Khan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Deepak Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- Amrendra Nath Rai,G.A.,Sanjay Singh Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. List revised. 2. None appeared on behalf of the applicant to press this application. 3. Shri Shashidhar Pandey, learned AGA for the State and Shri Sanjay Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 are present. 4. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of judgement and order dated 19.04.2014 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Shahjahanpur in Case No.254 of 2013, under Section 125 (3) Cr.P.C., P.S. Rauza, District Shahjahanpur. 5. This is a case where opposite party no.2 happens to be the wife of the applicant and due to matrimonial discord, opposite party no.2 had filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. seeking maintenance from her husband in which the Family Court vide order dated 03.05.2008 granted interim maintenance of Rs.500/- to the wife and Rs.300/- each to three children, total Rs.1400/- per month per month, against the said order, the applicant had filed a revision, which was dismissed vide order dated 19.09.2009, thereafter, the applicant had filed a writ petition before this Court in which initially the Court had granted stay order but finally it was dismissed vide order dated 01.05.2013, it is thereafter, the opposite party no.2 has filed a case for execution of order dated 03.05.2008, which was allowed vide order dated 19.04.2014 directing the applicant to pay the balance amount by the next date fixed otherwise coercive measures will be adopted against him to recover the said maintenance amount. The said order is under challenge by means of this application on the ground that the execution case was filed with delay. 6. Learned A.G.A. as well as counsel for opposite party no.2 contends that in earlier writ petition filed by the applicant there was an interim order, because of that interim order, the wife could not move the execution case, and soon after the dismissal of the writ petition, opposite party no.2 had filed the execution case. They further submits that the order dated 19.04.2014 is a detailed order wherein the objection of the applicant was considered on merits and there is no delay in filing the execution case as there was an interim order of this Court in earlier writ petition filed by the applicant, and the applicant could not file the execution case before the dismissal of writ petition. They further pointed out that till date the applicant has not paid the maintenance amount and has preferred the instant application before this Court with sole intention to delay or avoid the payment of the same. Lastly it is contended that there is no illegality, impropriety or infirmity in the order passed by the court below, hence, no interference is required by this Court in the impugned order.. 7. To buttress their argument, learned A.G.A. as well as counsel for opposite party no.2 have placed reliance on a judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bhuwan Mohan Singh vs Meena & Ors, AIR 2014 Supreme Court 2875 wherein the Court has held that Section 125 Cr.P.C. was conceived to ensure that a woman, who has left or thrown out of matrimonial house, can sustain herself and her children. The Court further held that concept of sustenance does not necessarily mean "to lead the life of an animal", rather the wife would be entitled in law to lead a life in the similar manner as she would have lived in the house of her husband. 8. On perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the revisional court has returned a specific finding that the applicant has failed to produce any document showing that he has ever made payment of the maintenance amount awarded by the court below to his wife. I find that the court below has not committed any illegality while passing the impugned order. 9. In view of aforesaid proposition of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court and the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that filing of this application is nothing but pure abuse of process of law and there is no merit in this application as the same has been filed just to delay the payment of maintenance amount to the wife and children. 10. The instant application is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 10.7.2025 S.P. Digitally signed by :- SANJAY PURI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad