Back
YOGENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
Mohammad Usman – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
ORDER :
(Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, J.)
1. Heard Sri T.N. Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pankaj Saxena, learned Additional Government Advocate-I appearing along with Ms. Sushma Soni, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State-opposite party.
2. The present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973,[the code] has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings of Execution Case No. 47 of 2018 (Shahar Bano Vs. Usman alias Bhai Lal) under Section 128 of the Code, Police Station-Sarai Mamrej, District Allahabad along with orders dated 13.02.2021/15.02.2021 passed by learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Court No. 1, Allahabad.
3. The facts of the case as per the pleadings in the affidavit are to the effect that an application under section 125 of the Code filed by the opposite party No. 2 was allowed by means of an ex-parte order dated 06.08.2015 with a direction to make payment of a monthly allowance of Rs. 1,000/- for life to the opposite party No. 2, and monthly allowance of Rs. 500/- each to the opposite party Nos. 3, 4, 5 and 6, till they attain majority.
4. Proceedings for enforcement of the aforesaid order of maintena
The magistrate can impose a maximum of one month imprisonment for each month of default in maintenance payments under Section 125(3) of the Cr.P.C.
The court emphasized the summary nature of the proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and the objective to provide immediate relief to the applicant.
The court affirmed that a second application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. is maintainable despite the dismissal of the first without liberty, emphasizing the continuing duty to maintain.
A husband's imprisonment for non-payment does not absolve his obligation to pay maintenance; ongoing enforcement is essential to protect the recipient's welfare.
Imprisonment for non-payment of maintenance under Section 125(3) of the Cr.P.C. serves as a mode of enforcement and does not discharge the underlying liability; the court can impose sentences for eac....
Issuance of arrest warrants for recovery of maintenance arrears is illegal; enforcement must comply with statutory provisions protecting individual dignity and liberty.
The court established that the provisions of Sections 125, 126, and 127 Cr.P.C. allow for the recall and modification of maintenance orders, and that Section 362 Cr.P.C. does not impose a bar on such....
The right to maintenance under S.125, CrPC is absolute and designed to ensure dignified living for spouses and children, despite claims of financial hardship by the husband.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
