Court No. - 49
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 13916 of 2018 Applicant :- Chhunna Lal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Ors Counsel for Applicant :- Shyam Narayan Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present application has been filed against the order dated 7.2.2018 passed by learned Additional District Judge/F.T.C. II, Jaunpur, by which the monthly maintenance allowance @ Rs. 2000/- per month has been awarded to the opposite party no.2 and @ Rs. 1000/- per month to the opposite party no.3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the opposite party no.2 is running her own beauty parlor and therefore, she has no need of any maintenance allowance.
It has then been submitted that the applicant does not have any resources to provide for maintenance allowance and therefore, the maintenance allowance is excessive. In so far as the argument has been raised that the opposite party no.2 is having earning from a beauty parlor, it is seen at this stage, no different conclusion can be drawn on basis of pleadings in absence of evidence being led before the learned Court below. At present only an order for interim maintenance allowance has been passed. It is open to the applicant to lead such evidence as may be available to him to establish that the opposite party no.2 has sufficient means of sustenance and that no order need to be passed in her favour under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Therefore, the provision of maintenance allowance at this stage cannot be faulted on the plea raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.
As to amount of maintenance allowance, it is seen that a wholly minimal amount have been awarded @ Rs. 2000/- per month to opposite party no.2 and @ Rs. 1000/- per month to opposite party no.3 has been awarded. In this contest, it is further noted that it is not disputed that the applicant is an able bodied person and therefore, it may be safely assumed that he would have means to provide for interim maintenance allowance @ Rs. 3000/- (in all) per month.
However, considering the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant, the present application is disposed of with a direction that: the applicant shall continue to comply with the impugned order, the proceeding under Section 125 Cr.P.C. itself may be expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of the production of a certified copy of this order without allowing any undue or long adjournment.
Order Date :- 24.4.2018 Mini