Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 63670 (ALL)

GEETA DEVI v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

NA529/1781/2025 · 2025-07-14

Nalin Kumar Srivastava

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:113661 Court No. - 83 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 529 BNSS No. - 1781 of 2025 Applicant :- Geeta Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kuldeep Kumar Dube Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. This application under Section 529 BNSS has been filed with a prayer to direct the court concerned to decide the Case No. 1884 of 2020 under Section 304 I.P.C. and Section 128 Cr.P.C., P.S.- Line Bazar, District- Jaunpur pending in the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court 1st, Jaunpur expeditiously. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is the wife of opposite party no.2. In the proceeding under Section 125 CrPC initiated by the present applicant an order was passed against the opposite party no.2 to pay Rs. 4000/- per month as maintenance to the applicant. It is also submitted that applicant is unemployed and is totally dependent upon her parents and she is at the verge of starvation. It is also submitted that when no amount was paid by the opposite party no.2, the applicant was compelled to move an application under Section 128 CrPC but the same is still pending and as a matter of fact the whole amount has not been paid so far by opposite party no.2/ husband. Applicant is not in a position to attend the Court for the pairvi of the case on each and every date. 4. I have considered the submissions and perused the record. 5. From perusal of the record it appears that the learned trial Court has made several attempts to procure the presence of opposite party no.2 and also to realize the money by attachment of property of opposite party no.2/ husband but the office of the District Magistrate is not cooperating. The Court of law has ample power to pass any suitable order to ensure the execution of the order passed by the Court. 6. In the circumstances, the trial Court concerned is directed to invoke its powers granted by the relevant laws to him and in any case realize the maintenance amount by attachment of property of opposite party no.2/ husband. This exercise should be completed within three months from from the date of production of certified copy of this order before it, if there is no legal impediment. 7. It is also made clear that the Court / Presiding Officer is not the only stake holder in the trial and disposal of a case, hence, besides the P.O. concerned, all the stake holders i.e. police and executive authorities, counsels, parties to the case, staff etc. are also made bound by this order and it will be their responsibility also to assist the Court in every manner for the expeditious disposal of this case. 8. With the above observations, the application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 15.7.2025 Fhd Digitally signed by :- FAHAD NIYAZ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad