Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 60938 (ALL)

ANVAR ALI v. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

NA528/18084/2025 · 2025-05-27

Raj Beer Singh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:91175 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 18084 of 2025 Applicant :- Anvar Ali Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Deena Nath,Satya Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record. 2. This application under Section - 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as BNSS) has been filed seeking following relief:- "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow the instant application and quash the Judgment and order dated 03.12.2022, passed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Court No.3, Allahabad in Maintenance Case No.814 of 2019 (Smt. Jehana Begum and another vs. Anvar Ali), under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Naini, District Allahabad and entire proceeding of Execution Case No.01 of 2023 (Smt. Jehana Begum and another vs. Anvar Ali), under Section 128 Cr.P.C., Police Station Naini, Prayagraj, pending in the court of Additional Principal Judge, Family Court No.3, Allahabad." 3. Perusal of record shows that by impugned ex-parte order dated 03.12.2022 maintenance has been granted by Family Court under Section - 125 Cr.P.C. in favour of opposite party nos.2 & 3. In view of law laid down in case of Smt. Anjana Mukhopadhyay Vs. State of U.P. and Another 2023:AHC:2129445, Ashu Jain Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others 2023:AHC:165660 and Liaqat Hussain Vs. Jainab Praveen and Another AIRONLINE 2020 ALL 2497, it is clear that an order of maintenance or interim maintenance is not an interlocutory order and that against such orders, aggrieved person has remedy of revision. It was held that against such order, application under Section - 482 Cr.P.C. is not maintainable. The provisions of Section 482 Cr.P.C. 1973 have been reincarnated in Section 528 of BNSS and thus, similar analogy would be applicable to the application under Section 528 BNSS. 4. Thus, it is apparent that this application under Section - 528 BNSS against impugned order dated 03.12.2022 is not maintainable. 5. Accordingly, this application under Section - 528 BNSS is dismissed as not maintainable. 6. However, the applicant would be at liberty to file criminal revision or to resort remedy available under law. The certified copies available on record may be returned back to learned counsel for applicant after retaining photocopy of same on record. Order Date :- 28.5.2025 'SP'/- Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad