Allahabad High Court

KUSHVENDRA KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 23 April 2026
Bench: ACHAL SACHDEV

Holding

The High Court held that the applicant failed to demonstrate any error or abuse of process by the trial court, and therefore the application under Section 528 BNSS was dismissed.

Summary

The applicant, Kushvendra Kumar, filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash an interim maintenance order of Rs.7,500 per month granted by the Meerut Family Court in a Section 125 Cr.P.C. case. He alleged that the opposite party, his alleged wife, had fabricated a marriage certificate, blackmailed him with compromising videos, and previously filed false criminal complaints to extort money. The opposite party contended that the trial court correctly awarded maintenance and that there was no abuse of process. The High Court examined the record and found no evidence of error or abuse of law by the trial court in granting interim maintenance. It noted that the applicant has an alternative remedy of filing a criminal revision before the court. Consequently, the Court dismissed the application under Section 528 BNSS.

Issues considered

Whether the interim maintenance order under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was obtained by abuse of process or fraud.
Whether the High Court should interfere with the Family Court's interim maintenance order in the absence of a demonstrated error.

Legislation cited

BNSS (Banking and National Settlement System) Act — s. 528
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 125
Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — s. 12, 13-B, 7
Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 498-A, 504

Subjects

interim maintenance
Section 125 CrPC
fraudulent marriage claim
abuse of process
criminal revision
BNSS application
forgery
blackmail

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 46248 of 2025

Kushvendra Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arun Bhanu Shukla, Shubhangini
Dwivedi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Hemant Kumar

Court No. - 81
HON'BLE ACHAL SACHDEV, J.

1. This application u/s 528 BNSS has been preferred by the applicant
challenging the entire proceeding including the interim order dated
08.07.2025, passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Meerut, in
Case No.557 of 2024 (Smt. Anchal Chaudhary Vs. Kushvendra Kumar),
under section 125 Cr.P.C., 1973, whereby the application 10-A, moved by
the opposite party no.2 for interim maintenance was allowed and the
applicant was directed to pay interim maintenance of RS.7,500/- per month
to the opposite party no.2/wife, from the date of application.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the opposite party no.2
filed a claim petition 10-A dated 24.06.2024, under section 125 Cr.P.C.,
claiming maintenance of Rs.50,000/- per month. Thereafter, the applicant
file reply 23-A on 17.03.2025, denying the marriage with opposite party
no.2.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the opposite party no.2
approached the applicant for a room on rent to start her own beauty parlor,
which was provided by the applicant in his plot C-38 Gol Coast Colony, near
Godwin Public School, Kankarkheda Police Station Meerut. Subsequently
the opposite party no.2 and applicant grew close to each other and taking
advantage of the trust of applicant, the opposite party no.2 got him
NA528 No. 46248 of 2025
2

intoxicated and made some objectionable videos of him and further started
blackmailing him using those videos. The opposite party no.2 also made
forged marriage certificate dated 10.12.2023 depicting a registered marriage
between opposite party no.2 and the applicant, in which her father name is
mentioned as Rajesh Chaudhary. On inquiry by RTI, 2005 regarding the said
marriage certificate, the applicant received information dated 08.01.2025
that no such documents exist in government record, which is annexed as
annexure no.5 to the writ petition. Thereafter, opposite party no.2 lodged
FIR on 09.07.2024, in pursuance of which proceedings in Criminal Case
No.37 of 2024, under sections 498-A, 504 IPC and section 3/4, Dowry
Prohibition Act commenced at Sessions Court, Meerut. Against which the
applicant earlier preferred application u/s 528 BNSS No.8437 of 2025 and
this court referred the matter to the mediation centre of this Court, mediation
was successful and parties arrived to an agreement dated 22.05.2025
(Annexure no.7). Thereafter, applicant filed an application on 04.12.2024 in
Case No.3149 of 2024, u/s 7/12 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, before the
Family Court, Meerut, to declare the alleged marriage between opposite
party no.2 and the applicant null and void, which is still pending.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the opposite party
no.2 played the same trick to extract money from her ex-husband and lodged
false case against him and his family members bearing Case Crime No.62 of
2021 (State Vs. Saurabh and Others), under sections 498-A, 323, IPC and
section ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act, District Meerut, in which parties
entered into settlement on 13.03.2023 wherein opposite party no.2 received
Rs.4,50,000/- and got mutual divorce in Case No.2414 of 2023 (Anchal Vs.
Saurabh), under section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act, from Family Court
Meerut. Therefore, he submits that looking at the aforesaid act of opposite
party no.2, the impugned interim order dated 08.07.2025, is liable to be
quashed.
NA528 No. 46248 of 2025
3

5. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 as well as learned AGA for the
State have opposed the aforesaid arguments of learned counsel for the
applicant and submitted that learned trial court has rightly allowed the
application under section 125 Cr.P.C. moved by the opposite party no.2/wife
against the applicant/husband and there is no illegality or abuse of process of
law in the impugned order dated 08.07.2025 passed by learned trial court.

6. Heard Ms. Shubhangini Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri
Hemant Kumar, learned counsel for opposite party no.2, learned AGA for
the State and perused the record.

7. In the aforesaid circumstances and perusal of record, this Court is of the
view that the applicant has failed to show any instance whereby it can be
averred that the learned trial court has committed any error or abuse of the
process of the law, while allowing the application under section 125 Cr.P.C.
and granting interim maintenance to the opposite party no.2/wife.

8. The applicant/husband has an alternative remedy to file the criminal
revision before this Court and the applicant has to rebut the arguments made
before the revisional Court. The applicant, may if so desires, may file a
criminal revision before this Court and due to existence of the said
alternative remedy under the law, the present application is liable to be
dismissed.

9. Accordingly, the present application u/s 528 of BNSS is hereby
dismissed.

April 24, 2026
VKG
(Achal Sachdev,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
VIJAY KUMAR GUPTA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…