Allahabad High Court
Smt. Nhid Anjum And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 1 February, 2010
Author: Rakesh Tiwari
Bench: Rakesh Tiwari
Court No. - 42 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2856 of 2010 Petitioner :- Smt. Nhid Anjum And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Petitioner Counsel :- M.A Haseen Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Rakesh Tiwari,J.
Heard counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. and perused the record. Marriage of the applicant no. 1 was solemnised with the opposite party no. 2 on 28.9.2002. Due to alleged demand of dowry, the applicant claims that she was thrown out of the house of her in laws alongwith her minor child and she started living in her parents house. It is stated that the applicant was not being paid even a single penny after, the aforesaid incident, as such she filed case No. 343/11/06 under section 125, Cr.P.C. in family court, Moradabad, praying for Rs. 5000/-per month each, total Rs. 10000/- towards maintenance for herself and her child. The applicant in the aforesaid maintenance case moved an application for grant of interim maintenance, in which objection was filed by opposite party no. 2 and the court vide its order dated 14.9.2007 awarded Rs. 500/- for the applicant and Rs. 300/- for her child per month as interim maintenance. Against the aforesaid order dated 14.9.07, the opposite party no. 2- husband filed criminal revision no. 3074/2007 before the High Court in which an ad interim order dated 8.10.2007 was passed staying operation of the order of interim maintenance dated 14.9.2007.
It is submitted that now case No. 343/11/06 under section 125, Cr.P.C. filed by the applicant has been finally decided vide order dated 21.1.2009 but even then not even a single penny has been paid to the applicant as stay is operating in the revision and that application moved by the applicant under section 125(3), Cr.P.C. has been rejected by the court below on this ground vide order dated 10.11.2009 which is appended as annexure no. 6, in which the court has observed that applicant may get the revision decided first. Contention of the counsel for applicant is that since case No. 343/11/06 has been finally decided by the court below and as the aforesaid revision was filed only against the order dated 14.9.2007 granting interim maintenance, as such the revision has become infructuous and no order needs to be passed therein. It is further argued that since matter has been finally decided, therefore it would not come in the way of execution of final award in the case and as such the impugned order dated 10.11.2009 passed by the family court directing the applicant to first get the revision decided, is illegal and unjustified. Learned A.G.A. submits that since interim order granted in the revision is operating, this application under section 482, Cr.P.C. would not lie for bypassing the interim order passed in the revision. He further submits that proper procedure for the applicant is to move an application in the pending revision bringing the subsequent facts to the notice of the High Court with prayer for passing of appropriate orders.
In the facts and circumstances, the applicant may move application in the aforesaid revision for redressal of her grievance as too it has become infructuous or not.
The application is accordingly rejected with the above observation. Order Date :- 1.2.2010/SNT/