Court No. - 68
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6648 of 2019 Applicant :- Rafeek Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Mir Sayed Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to stay the operation of the impugned judgement and order dated 16.11.2018 ( annexure no. 1 to the affidavit ) in complaint case no. 3678 of 2017, under section 31 of Domestic Violence Act and the impugned order dated 21.11.2016 (annexure no. 2 to the affidavit ) passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no. 5, Meerut in case no. 70888 of 2015, Smt. Ameer Jahan Vs. Rafeek.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that the opp. party no. 2 is the wife of the applicant who is not living with the applicant since 15.6.2008 and she is living at her parental house on her own will. The applicant has filed a suit for restitution and conjugal right before the Principal Judge, Family Court. In spite of service of notice upon the opp. party no. 2, she has not appeared in that case. That case was decided ex-parte on 4.7.2014 against the opp. party no. 2. In counterblast, the opp. party no. 2 has filed a case no. 70888 of 2015 under section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act against the applicant in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 5th Meerut and in that case vide order dated 21.11.2016, the applicant was directed to pay Rs. 4000/- to the opp. party no. 2 as an interim maintenance. The applicant filed an appeal against the order dated 21.11.2016. In appeal the amount was reduced to the tune of Rs. 3000/-. The applicant could not pay the amount of interim maintenance, then the opp. party no. 2 filed an execution application before the court below. Vide order dated 16.11.2018, a recovery warrant was issued against the applicant. The applicant is a senior citizen aged about 65 years. The applicant is unable to pay Rs. 72000/- as interim maintenance to the opp. party no. 2 as per impugned order dated 16.11.2018. The impugned orders of courts below is not in accordance with law. It has been further argued that the applicant is ready to pay interim maintenance in instalments.
On the other hand learned A.G.A. argued that vide order dated 16.11.2018 recovery warrant has been issued against the applicant as he has not paid the amount of interim maintenance to the opp. party no. 2. There is no illegality or irregularity in the judgement and orders of the courts below.
A perusal of record shows that Rs. 4000/- was awarded to the opp. party no. 2 as interim maintenance. Vide order dated 21.11.2016 the same was reduced to the tune of Rs. 3000/- in Cr. Appeal filed on behalf of the applicant. The applicant has not paid any money as interim maintenance to the opp. party no. 2 due to which the opp. party no. 2 has filed an execution application. In that case recovery warrant was issued against the applicant vide order dated 16.11.2018.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I don't find any ground to stay the operation of the impugned judgement and orders dated 16.11.2018 and 21.11.2016 therefore, the prayer for staying the same is hereby refused.
Accordingly, the application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is hereby dismissed.
Order Date :- 25.2.2019 Gss