The Allahabad High Court while allowing the petition held that the maintenance application under section 125 CrPC cannot be decided pending Section 340 CrPC Application.
A Single Bench of Justice Vipin Chandra Dixit passed this order while hearing a Criminal Revision filed by Amit Bajpai.
The criminal revision has been filed by the revisionist against the order dated 14.06.2023 passed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Kanpur Nagar in Case by which the application filed on behalf of opposite party no 2 under Section 125 Cr.P.C was allowed and revisionist was directed to pay maintenance @ Rs 5,000/- per month from the date of application i.e 17.03.2020.
It is submitted by the counsel for the revisionist that opposite party no 2 has filed a false affidavit disclosing herself as a housewife whereas she is working as a Physiotherapist in Jai Ram Hospital, Kanpur Nagar.
The revisionist had moved an application under Section 340 Cr.P.C on 31.03.2022 with the prayer to initiate appropriate proceedings against the opposite party no 2 for giving false affidavit before the Court.
This fact has been brought before the Family Court where the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C was pending, which is evident from the order sheet dated 31.03.2022.
It is further submitted by the counsel for the revisionist that the Family Court without deciding the application filed by the revisionist under Section 340 Cr.P.C has proceeded with the case and decided the application filed by opposite party no 2 under Section 125 Cr.P.C and maintenance has been awarded on relying the false affidavit filed by opposite party no 2.
The Court noted that,
Counsel for the revisionist further placed reliance on the judgement dated 09.01.2003 passed by Lucknow Bench. Relevant paragraph is reproduced hereunder:-
“In my view, if any application is moved in the pending case bringing to the notice of the court that any false evidence knowing well has been filed or fabricated in such proceedings, the court should dispose of the said application first before proceeding any further or before recording of further evidence. In the circumstances, I dispose of the present application and direct the Additional Principal Judge Family Court to dispose of the application so moved by the petitioner under Section 340, 344 Cr.P.C before proceeding further in accordance with law.”
Counsel for the opposite party no 2 and A.G.A for the State do not dispute the legal position.
In view of the above, the Court allowed the criminal revision.
“The order dated 14.06.2023 passed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Kanpur Nagar is set aside.
The Principal Judge, Family Court, Court No-1/court concerned is directed to decide the application filed by revisionist under Section 340 Cr.P.C which was registered as Misc Application within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order, and thereafter the application filed by opposite party no 2 under Section 125 Cr.P.C expeditiously, without granting undue adjournments to either of the parties unless there is any legal impediments”, the Court ordered.