Court No. - 64
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28938 of 2019 Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Singh Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Rai,Saurabh Trivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karuna Nand Bajpayee,J.
Heard applicant's counsel as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Submission of the counsel is that an ex-parte order was passed by the Court which was recalled under section 126(2) Cr.P.C. but condition that has been imposed is that the applicant is required to deposit Rs.2 lakhs within a month. Submission is that imposition of such disproportionately high amount is going to inevitably cause excessive hardship to the applicant and is beyond the means and purse of the applicant to meet out. Further submission is that imposition of such high amount is not a reasonable order. No doubt the Court can impose cost and may impose conditions but there has to be a proportionate judicial order in that regard. At the stage where the evidence is yet to come and the merits of the case are yet to be assessed, estimated and adjudicated upon, fixing such high amount smacks of judicial arbitrariness. It is necessary in order to meet the ends of justice to strike a balance. It was also pointed out that another proceedings under section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act the applicant is already giving Rs.7,000/- per month to the wife as interim maintenance.
Contentions raised at the bar require detailed hearing on law and facts both.
Notice on behalf of opposite party No.1 has been accepted by learned A.G.A.
Issue notice to the opposite party no.2 returnable within four weeks.
Opposite party no.2 may file counter affidavit within three weeks after the service. Learned A.G.A. may also file counter affidavit within the same period. Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within two weeks thereafter.
List this matter immediately after expiry of the aforesaid period before the appropriate bench.
The operation of the impugned order dated 19.06.2019 passed by learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Court No.3, Muzaffar Nagar in Case No.348 of 2011 (Arvind Vs. Shalu), under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C., P.S.- Nai Mandi, District- Muzaffar Nagar, so far as it relates to condition no.1 directing the revisionist to deposit Rs.2,00,000/- towards arrears of maintenance, shall remain stayed provided and with the condition that the revisionist shall deposit Rs.20,000/- in place of Rs.2,00,000/- in the Court below within one month from today which shall be handed over to the wife during the pendency of this revision or till further orders of this Court.
It is being clarified that the proceeding under section 125 Cr.P.C. pending in the Court below shall go on against the revisionist.
Order Date :- 26.7.2019 shiv