IMPORTANT POINT
The court emphasized the importance of compliance with maintenance orders and directed the respondent to pay 20% of the arrears of maintenance within 20 days.

JUDGMENT

Swarana Kanta Sharma, J. - By way of this petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India and Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (`Cr.P.C.'), the petitioner-wife seeks appropriate directions in Ct. Case Nos. 691 of 2022 and Case No. 882 of 2022 pending before learned Metropolitan Magistrate (Mahila Court)-01, Tis Hazari Courts, Central, New Delhi. The petitioner prays for following reliefs:

"(a) Direct the Respondent to pay the maintenance as directed by Ld. Additional Sessions Judge vide order dated 01.02.2019 including arrears;

(b) Direct attachment of bank accounts of the Respondent as detailed in para 38 above so that necessary compliance can be made.

(c) In the alternative, direct Ld. MM (Mahila Court)-01, Tis Hazari, Central, New Delhi to issue necessary directions regarding the interim maintenance in Ct. Case nos. 691 of 2022 and 882 of 2022 finally on the next date of hearing i.e., 28.01.2022 without any adjournment."

2. Facts of the present case are that the marriage between the petitioner-wife and respondent-husband was solemnized on 30.04.2015 and subsequently, an FIR bearing no. 34/2016 was registered on the complaint of petitioner at Police Station Mahila Thana, Gautam Buddh Nagar, U.P. under Sections 498A/323/504 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. Thereafter, the respondent had filed a Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition before the High Court of Allahabad for stay on arrest and quashing of the FIR. Pursuant to the same, on 06.05.2016, the High Court of Allahabad had passed the order by way of which the matter was referred to mediation and an order of stay of arrest of respondent was passed. However, on 22.09.2016, the High Court of Allahabad had dismissed the writ petition due to lack of merits. Thereafter, the petitioner had filed an Application No. 4622 of 2016 under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (`PWDV Act') before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar, wherein an application seeking interim maintenance had also been filed by her under Section 23 of the Act. The learned Judicial Magistrate vide order dated 10.05.2018 had directed the respondent to pay interim maintenance of Rs.35,000/- (Rupees Thirty-Five Thousand Only) to the petitioner. Against the said order, appeals had been preferred by both the parties and the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gautam Budh Nagar vide order dated 01.02.2019, had modified the order dated 10.05.2018 and had directed the respondent to pay Rs.45,000/- per month to the petitioner as well as Rs.55,000/- per month to the daughter. Aggrieved by these orders granting interim maintenance, the respondent had preferred an Application bearing No. 12860/2019 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. before the High Court of Allahabad and the matter was again referred to mediation vide order dated 09.04.2019 and the counsel for the petitioner at that time had given an undertaking that during the course of mediation, they will not initiate any action against the respondent. However, the mediation between the parties had failed on 06.07.2019.Subsequently, the petitioner had preferred a Criminal Application No. 41/2019 under Section 31(1) of PWDV Act against the respondent for non-compliance of order dated 01.02.2019 i.e. for non-payment of interim maintenance and summons were issued by the Court of learned Additional Civil Judge, Third, Gautam Budh Nagar, but these summons were challenged by the respondent before High Court of Allahabad vide Application No. 33533/2019 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and the summons were stayed vide order dated 16.09.2019 till next date of hearing.

3. Vide order dated 13.12.2019, the High Court of Allahabad had directed expeditious disposal of application filed by the petitioner under Section 12 of PWDV Act which was pending before learned Judicial Magistrate as there was no stay of proceedings. Thereafter, the respondent had ultimately preferred trans