Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:82804 Court No. - 87 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 27965 of 2024 Applicant :- Sandeep Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and others Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Sharma,Prashant Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State-O.P. no.1 and perused the record. 2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been filed by the applicant praying for quashing recovery warrant order dated 14.05.2024 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Hathras in Case no.670 of 2023 (Priyanka vs. Sandeep) under Section 125(3) Cr.P.C. P.S.Sahapau, District-Hathras and also to direct the court below to decide recall application of the applicant dated 24.01.2024 recalling ex parte order dated 18.10.2023 in Case No.346 of 2020 and Case No.253 of 2022. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that marriage of the applicant was solemnized with O.P. no.2 on 22.11.2019, however, after only few days of marriage O.P. no.2 returned to her matrimonial home. Thereafter, O.P. no.2 preferred an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. in the year 2020. He submitted that after sometime one male child born to O.P. no.2 and another application u/s 125 Cr.P.C. was filed on behalf of the minor son/O.P. no.3. He submitted that the court below vide order dated 18.01.2023 has decided both the applications u/s 125 Cr.P.C. and directed the applicant to pay ₹8000/- per month to wife/O.P. no.2 and 5000/- ₹ per month to O.P. no.3. He submitted that the applicant was not served with notice in the said proceedings and he was denied of the opportunity to contest the proceedings u/s 125 Cr.P.C. He next submitted that O.P. no.2 further moved an application u/s 125(3) seeking execution of order dated 18.10.2023, on which court below has passed recovery warrant order on 14.05.2024, which has been assailed by means of instant application. He further submitted that the court below has committed manifest error of law by not deciding the recall application of the applicant before issuing recovery warrant order. He next submitted that the impugned order is an ex parte order, which is absolutely erroneous in nature and also suffers from gross illegality. He further submitted that the financial status of applicant is not so sound that he could pay the maintenance amount awarded by the court below, which is on higher side. In the aforesaid backdrop, he submitted that the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the application and contends that the Court below has awarded maintenance of ₹13000/- per month in all for two persons i.e. wife and minor son of the applicant (O.P. nos.2 and 3), which is considerably meagre amount for the said purpose, hence, no interference is required by this Court in the impugned order. 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. In the case in hand, on perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the trial court had directed the applicant to pay the maintenance amount of ₹13,000/- per month to O.P. nos.2 and 3, regularly. Even though, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is ready and willing to pay the said amount, but no cheque or bank draft has been produced before this Court with regard to the said payment. There is nothing on record to show his bonafide except a bald statement that he is ready and willing to pay the entire outstanding amount. 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 dues to the wife. 8. The instant application is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 14.5.2025 Manish Himwan Digitally signed by :- MANISH HIMWAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad