Allahabad High Court
KAMLESH KUMAR SHRIWASTVAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- DEEPAK VERMA
Holding
The application to quash the ex‑parte order is dismissed; the order stands.
Summary
The husband, Kamlesh Kumar Shriwastva, filed an application under Section 528 of the CrPC seeking to quash an ex‑parte order dated 27‑08‑2025 passed by the Civil Judge (J.D.)/F.T.C. in a domestic‑violence case (Swati Srivastava v. Kamlesh Kumar Shriwastva). The order had granted the wife interim maintenance of Rs 10,000 per month and a compensation of Rs 1 lakh under Sections 12 and 20 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The husband alleged that the order was passed without his presence, was malicious, and that the marriage had ended with the wife leaving the house. The High Court examined the pleadings, noted that the marriage was solemnised in 2018, a child was born, and that the wife had alleged domestic violence, leading to the magistrate’s award. The Court held that the prayer to quash the order was not maintainable, refused the application, and directed the husband to pursue an appeal or recall of the ex‑parte order. The application was consequently disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the ex‑parte order granting interim maintenance and compensation under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act can be quashed under Section 528 of the CrPC.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
- Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 — s. 12, 20
Subjects
- Domestic Violence
- Interim Maintenance
- Compensation
- Ex parte order
- Quash application
- Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act
- Appeal
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 20182 of 2026
Kamlesh Kumar Shriwastva
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Alok Kumar Srivastava, Shweta
Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 74
HON'BLE DEEPAK VERMA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant; learned A.G.A. for the State
and perused the record.
2. Present application has been filed to quash the impugned order dated
27-08-2025 passed the learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/ F.T.C., Court No. 03,
Ballia in Criminal Misc. Case No. 8226 of 2020 (Smt. Swati Srivastava
Vs. Kamlesh Kumar Shriwastva) under Section 12 of the Protection of
Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 Police Station Bansdech,
District Ballia.
3. Counsel for the applicant submits that by the impugned order dated 27-
08-2025, the learned Magistrate allowed the application under Sections 12
of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act and decided ex-
parte with direction that applicant-husband shall pay Rs.10,000/- per
month as interim maintenance under Section 20 of D.V. Act and Rs.1
lakh as compensation. Counsel for the applicant submits that order
impugned has been passed ex-parte and instant proceedings is malicious
only to harass the applicants. It is next submitted that marriage was
solemnized in the year 2018 and thereafter one child born. The opposite
party no. 2 herself left the house of applicants.
4. Considered the argument of counsel for the applicant and perused the
record. On perusal of complaint and order impugned challenge herein
disclose that applicant is husband of opposite party no. 2 and marriage
NA528 No. 20182 of 2026
2
was solemnized in the year 2018. The applicant and opposite party no. 2
both have second marriage and after marriage opposite party no.2 lived
with applicant. Thereafter on account of domestic violence, opposite party
no. 2 filed present application. The learned Magistrate, after considering
the contents of complaint, allowed the application of opposite party no. 2
and awarded Rs.Rs.10,000/- per month as interim maintenance under
Section 20 of D.V. Act and Rs.1 lakh as compensation. It is also apparent
that applicant has not paid single penny to the opposite party no. 2. The
prayer to quash the proceedings, prima facie, is not being considered and
is, hereby, refused.
5. However, the applicant has remedy to file appeal or recall of the
exparte order.
6. The application is, accordingly, disposed of.
(Deepak Verma,J.)
May 18, 2026
Meenu Singh
Digitally signed by :-
MEENU SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…