Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:89548 Court No. - 87 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 30292 of 2017 Applicant :- Abdul Salam Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Aditya Veer Singh Rana,Aditya Vir Singh Rana,Dinesh Chandra Rajput,Mohd. Shoeb Khan,Salman Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing impugned order dated 26.08.2017 passed by learned Principal Judge Family Court, Moradabad in suit no. 481/9/10, under section 125 Cr.P.C. (Smt. Shahajahan vs. Abdul Salam.). 3. This is a case where opposite party no.2 happens to be the wife of the applicant and opposite party no. 2 happens to be the minor son of applicant and due to matrimonial discord, she had filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. seeking maintenance from her husband. The application was allowed by the Family Court vide order dated 26.08.2017 accorded interim maintenance of Rs. 4000/- per month to O.P. no.2 and rejected the maintenance sought for opposite party no. 3. The order dated 26.08.2017 has been assailed by means of this application on the ground that learned Principal Judge without considering the fact that opposite party no. 2 is literate lady and is capable to maintain her family, and passed the impugned order in a very cursury manner, therefore the same is liable to be quashed. 4. Learned A.G.A. contends 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. He 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 maintenance amount. 5. To buttress his argument, learned A.G.A. has 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. 6. On perusal of the record, it transpires that the applicant has till date not paid even a single penny to his wife/O.P. no.2 towards maintenance amount, which in my view, is just a ploy to avoid or delay payment of dues to his wife. 7. 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/O.P. no.2. 8. The instant application is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 26.5.2025 Bhanu Digitally signed by :- BHANU PRATAP KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad