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.

JUDGMENT :

PRAVEEN KUMAR GIRI, J.

1. Heard Sri Jaideep Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mahtab Alam and Sri R.K. Shukla, learned counsel for O.P. No.2 and Sri Shashidhar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present application has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for the relief mentioned in the prayer clause of the application. The relief sought in the application is delineated below:

"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow this application and to quash the order dated 23.01.2023 passed by Ld. Civil Judge (Junior Division)/F.T.C. (Crime against women), Moradabad in Execution Case No. 697 of 2022 Smt. Hasina Khatoon Vs. Ahmad @ Ramzani, under Section 31 of Domestic Violence Act-2005, arising out of Case No. 10095 of 2017, Hasina Khatoon Vs. Ahmad Ali , under Section 12 of Domestic Violence Act, by which the courts below partly rejecting the Execution Application the applicant for recovery of amount Rs. 2,64,000/-

AND in the meantime directing the court below to issue a recovery certificate against the Opposite Party No. 2 for amount of Rs. 2,64,000/- from the dues amount of the maintenance awarded as an interim maintenance for the period October-2022 to January-2023, and/or pass such other and further order, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

3. The factual matrix of the case is that the applicant was married with O.P. No.2 according to Muslim Customary rites on 23.05.1990 and from their wedlock one male child was born in 1992. Thereafter, some dispute arose between the parties and the O.P. No.2 ousted the applicant as well as her handicapped son from his house on 21.07.1995. The reason for throwing the applicant out of her matrimonial home was non-fulfillment of demand of dowry by applicant's parents. Thereafter, the applicant filed a case under Section 498-A of the I.P.C. etc. against her husband (O.P. no.2) and his relatives. In the year 2011, matter was compromised and the applicant started living with her husband (O.P. No.2). However, after some time i.e. on 20.05.2017, O.P. no.2 has again kicked out the applicant alongwith her son and from that day onward, she has been residing in the same village alongwith her handicapped son in a rented house.

4. The applicant (wife) alleged that the O.P. No.2 (Husband) failed to support and denied any financial assistance for her maintenance, whereas he was earning about Rs.50,000/- per month from various sources. Consequently, the applicant filed an application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. This application was registered as Case No. 10095 of 2017, ( Hasina Khatoon Vs. Ahmad Ali ), before the Court of A.C.J.M. IV, Moradabad. The applicant has also filed an interim maintenance application under Section 23 of Domestic Violence Act. O.P. No.2 appeared and filed his objections. However, after considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the trial court vide order dated 19.07.2019, allowed the interim maintenance application. The court directed the O.P. No.2 to pay Rs.4,000/- per month to the applicant, as well as Rs.4,000/- per month to her disabled son (totalling Rs.8,000/- per month) on 10th day of every month. The order dated 19.07.2019 is being pasted below:-

5. Typed copy of above order dated 19.07.2019 is reprodu