IMPORTANT POINT
A litigant should not try to overreach order passed by Court.

Headnote:
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Sections 125 and 482 [Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 – Sections 144 and 528] – Award of maintenance – High Court had set aside order of Family Court and restored Section 125 Cr.P.C. petition of appellant to its original number and directed Family Court to decide the case in accordance with law – High Court directed that said petition is required to be decided on merits by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court – No reason to interfere with impugned order – Said order is in favour of appellant and it only directed Family Court to adjudicate the matter afresh which was earlier dismissed by Family Court, for non-prosecution – Appellant instead of appearing before Family Court, has directly challenged order of High Court before Supreme Court, which is not proper – Order passed by High Court upheld. (Paras 5, 6 and 10)
Facts of the case:
Appellant has challenged order dated 20.12.2019 passed by Division Bench of High Court of Judicature of Allahabad, which was passed on a Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by appellant before High Court. Usually a Section 482 Cr.P.C. petition, as per rules of High Court goes before a Single Judge, but in present case it was decided by a Division Bench of High Court on direction of Apex Court.
Findings of Court:
Appellant, who has appeared in person, has filed a synopsis running into 128 pages, loaded with details much of which is not relevant. Appellant is not a trained Lawyer, but it is for Registry to have asked appellant to trim down synopsis. A synopsis cannot run into 128 pages.
Result : Civil Appeal dismissed.

ORDER

1. Delay in filing as well as in refiling stands condoned.

2. Leave granted.

3. In the present case, on the past few dates, the appellant has taken this Court to the long history of the case. The appellant was married to the respondent in the year 2006 and later she was successful in getting a decree of divorce on ground of cruelty in the year 2016.

However, the appellant before this Court has challenged the order dated 20.12.2019 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature of Allahabad, which was passed on a Petition under Section 482 CrPC filed by the appellant before the High Court. Usually a Section 482 CrPC petition, as per the rules of the High Court goes before a Single Judge, but in the present case it was decided by a Division Bench of the High Court and from the order it is so reflected that it was on the direction of the Apex Court. There is indeed an order of this Court dated 30.09.2019, which was passed in a Special Leave Petition filed by the present appellant in an earlier round of litigation. The order reads as under:

2. It is submitted that First Appeal No.275/2019 is pending in the High Court and the next date fixed for hearing is 15.10.2019.

3. It is also pointed out that Criminal Appeal No.482(A)- 29622/2019 is pending for hearing and the next date fixed for hearing in the High Court is 14.10.2019 and costs of Rs.10,000/- has been imposed upon the respondent on 23.09.2019 for dragging the case and not filing counter affidavit.

4. It is also pointed out that for violation of the interim maintenance order dated 22.07.2016 and not paying monthly amount of maintenance, Contempt Petition No.6653/2018 with connected CMP No.6662/2018 are pending in the High Court.

5. It is pointed out that criminal Case No.40/2016 under Section 406, 504, 506, 323 IPC is also pending against the opposite party before the Trial Court i.e. ACJM-12, Agra.

6. As the matters are pending before the High Court and the parties are litigating the matters, we consider it appropriate to request the Hon’ble Chief Justice of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad to assign the cases mentioned at paragraph Nos.2 to 4 to one Bench. We also request that the matters may be decided as expeditiously as possible, preferably within six months. We direct the opposite party to make the payment of arrears of maintenance within two months. The High Court shall also ensure that arrears of maintenance, if any due, are paid by the opposite party to the petitioner, within a period of two months.

7. We also request the ACJM-12, Agra, to decide the matter mentioned at paragraph 5, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within one year, subject to the cooperation of the complainant.

8. With respect to the medical emergency, it is open to the petitioner to make an appropriate prayer before the High Court.

9. The special leave petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.”

4. Consequent to the above order of this Court, the Division Bench of the High Court presided by the then Chief Justice had passed the following order in a S. 482 (Cr.P.C) petition of the present appellant:

By the order impugned dated 27th May, 2019, learned Judge, Family Court/FTC-1, Agra rejected an application preferred by the petitioner as per provisions of Section 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for the want of prosecution.

The order aforesaid was passed looking to the absence of the petitioner on 4th May, 2019, 7th May, 2019 and 17th May, 2019.

On going through the contents of the application preferred under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and also to meet

Click Here to Read the rest of this document