Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

DEVPRATAP @ RAJUversusState of U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided

Holding

The Court ordered that the arrears of maintenance be paid in 24 equal monthly instalments, with the regular monthly maintenance to continue as before.

Summary

The revisionist, Devpratap @ Raju, filed a criminal revision against the Family Court's order dated 18 September 2024 which awarded a monthly maintenance of Rs.4,000 to the opposite party No.2 under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The revisionist agreed to continue paying the monthly maintenance but sought to settle the arrears in instalments rather than a lump‑sum payment. The learned counsel for the revisionist proposed that the arrears be paid in 24 equal monthly instalments, with the provision that default would allow the opposite party to enforce the order. The High Court considered the request and directed that the arrears be paid in the stipulated 24 instalments, without prejudice to the regular monthly maintenance. It further warned that any default would permit the opposite party to execute the order as per law. Consequently, the revision was disposed of, leaving the payment schedule as ordered by the Court.

Issues considered

  • Whether the order of maintenance under Section 125 CrPC can be modified on revision to allow payment of arrears in instalments
  • Whether the revisionist is liable to continue paying the regular monthly maintenance while paying arrears in instalments

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • maintenance
  • Section 125 CrPC
  • family law
  • revision
  • arrears
  • execution

Judgment

                                              HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

                                                     CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 5797 of 2024

                                    Devpratap @ Raju
                                                                                                   .....Revisionist(s)
                                                                         Versus
                                    State of U.P. and Another
                                                                                                        .....Opposite
                                                                                                              Party(s)

                                    Counsel for Revisionist(s)               :    Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar
                                    Counsel for Opposite Party(s)            :    Sharad Kumar Singh, G.A.

                                    Court No. - 86
                                                          HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J.

                                    1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist.

                                    2. The instant revision has been filed against the order dated 18.9.2024
                                    passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Mainpuri in Case No.100
                                    of 2020 (Smt. Shivani vs. Devpratap @ Raju), under Section 125 CrPC,
                                    Police Station Aunchha, District Mainpuri, whereby a sum of Rs. 4,000/- has
                                    been awarded as monthly maintenance to opposite party No.2, from the date
                                    of application i.e. 17.3.2020.

                                    3. At the outset, learned counsel for the revisionist states that, the revisionist
                                    shall continue to pay a sum of Rs. 4,000/- as monthly maintenance without
                                    fail and on regular basis. However, so far as the arrears of amount is
                                    concerned, the same shall also be paid along with the monthly maintenance,
                                    but on installment basis.

                                    4. Hence, it is directed that the revisionist shall pay the arrears of amount in
                                    24 equal monthly installments, without fail. In default, the opposite party
                                    No.2 shall be at liberty to get the order executed, in accordance with law.

                                    5. Having regard to the statement made by learned counsel for the revisionist
                                    at Bar, the instant revision stands disposed of.

                                    March 18, 2026
                                    Gurpreet Singh
                                                                                                  (Harvir Singh,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
GURPREET SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.