Allahabad High Court
CRLR/221/2024 of MOHD USMAN Vs State of UP AND ANOTHER on 19 April 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 221 of 2024 Court No. - 40 HON'BLE GARIMA PRASHAD, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned AGA for the State and Sri Pawan Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the opposite party No.2. 2. By means of the present revision, the
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 221 of 2024
Court No. - 40
HON'BLE GARIMA PRASHAD, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned AGA for the State and Sri Pawan Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the opposite party No.2.
2. By means of the present revision, the revisionist is challenging the order dated 12.12.2023 passed by the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Moradabad under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C. rejecting his application and upholding the order dated 11.01.2022 whereby the application filed by the opposite party No.2 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. has been allowed directing the revisionist to pay maintenance of Rs.20,000/- per month to the opposite party No.2 from the date of application i.e. 26.2.2020.
3. At the outset, learned counsel for the revisionist submits that revisionist had filed his written submission on 9.11.2021 and that by order dated 19.9.2022, he has been permitted to deposit the entire arrears. Accordingly, the revisionist had deposited the entire arrears of Rs.11,60,000/- as on 20.3.2025 which has been recorded by the trial court in its order of the same date. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the revisionist that inspite of depositing entire arrears, the written submission of the revisionist was not considered and the application filed by him under Section 126 Cr.P.C. has been rejected. He prayed that the matter may be remanded back for fresh adjudication. Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Mukesh Joshi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Lalit Kumar Ojha, Pawan Kumar Shukla Mohd Usman .....Revisionist(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s)
4. Learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 has submitted that he has no objection if the case is remanded back to the court concerned to be adjudicated afresh if the revisionist continues to pay Rs.20,000/- per month to the opposite party No.2 till the matter is decided afresh by the trial court.
5. Learned counsel for the revisionist on instructions submits that the revisionist will continue to pay the amount of Rs.20,000/- as awarded by the trial court in the ex parte proceeding.
6. In view of the aforesaid the matter is remanded back to the trial court to consider the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. afresh after duly considering the written submission filed by the revisionist. The further proceedings to be adjudicated on merits and a fresh order by passed by the trial court expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
7. The revision is disposed of accordingly.
8. It is made clear that the revisionist shall continue to pay the amount of Rs.20,000/- per month till the proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. is decided afresh. In the event the revisionist does not deposit the said amount, the same can be recovered in execution proceedings. April 20, 2026 Kuldeep CRLR No. 221 of 2024 2 (Garima Prashad,J.) Digitally signed by :- KULDEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad