Court No. – 93
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION DEFECTIVE No. – 844 of 2024
Revisionist :- Nirmal Kumar Fukan
Opposite Party :- State Of Up And 3 Others
Counsel for Revisionist :- Rajesh Kumar,Sunil Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon’ble Vinod Diwakar,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist-husband, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent, and perused the record.
2. The instant revision has been preferred by the revisionist-husband assailing the legality and validity of the impugned judgment and order dated 19.01.2024, passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Auraiya in Case No. 172 of 2023, under section 125 Cr.P.C.
3. Matter requires consideration and notice be issued to respondent-wife.
4. Both, revisionist-husband and respondent-wife, are directed to file affidavit of Assets and Liabilities as mandated in Rajnesh v. Neha & Anr.1 disclosing all sources of income, on or before the next date of hearing.
5. At the outset, among other arguments, the learned counsel for the revisionist contends that the entire proceedings initiated by the respondentwife and the procedure adopted by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Auraiya contravene the judgments in Rajnesh v. Neha case (supra) and Smt. Parul Tyagi v. Gaurav Tyagi2. The learned counsel further asserts that the learned Principal Judge of the Family Court failed to adhere to the mandated procedures outlined in these judgments, thereby rendering the entire proceedings procedurally flawed and legally unsustainable.
6. The learned A.G.A. submits that the learned Principal Judge of the Family Court has not only committed contempt of its own Court by willfully disregarding the Supreme Court’s mandate in Rajnesh v. Neha case (supra) and the co-ordinate Bench’s judgment in Smt. Parul Tyagi v. Gaurav Tyagi case (supra) but has also undermined judicial propriety. This is against the rule of law. Learned A.G.A. further states that both judgments were widely circulated to all Family Courts within the territorial jurisdiction of Uttar Pradesh to ensure compliance and awareness.
7. This Court, in receipt of a letter dated 10.11.2023 from the Secretary- General, Supreme Court of India, in compliance of direction dated 06.11.2023, passed by Supreme Court3, recirculated the Rajnesh v. Neha case (supra) to the Registrars of all High Courts and, who, would in turn circulate it to all the districts in the State. It shall also be displayed on the website of all the District Courts/Family Courts/Courts of Judicial Magistrate for awareness and implementation.
8. In this connection, as per provision of Rule 4 (C) (10) of Chapter III of the Rules of the Court, 1952, the Administrative Committee of this Court issued a circular and a copy of Rajnesh v. Neha case (supra) and Aditi @ Mithi v. Jitesh Sharma case (supra) was sent to all the District Judges, Principal Judges of the Family Courts, Presiding Officers of MACTs, LARRAs, and the Commercial Courts for onward circulation amongst all the Judicial Officers working under their kind control for information and necessary compliance.
9. In the light of the foregoing discussions, learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Auraiya is called upon to submit a report about the compliance of above-referred judgments, passed by the Supreme Court and the co-ordinate Bench of this Court; learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Auraiya shall file an explanation as to why the mandate of Rajnesh v. Neha case (supra) and Smt. Parul Tyagi v. Gaurav Tyagi case (supra) was not followed while deciding Case No. 172 of 2023, under Section 125 Cr.P.C; learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Auraiya shall also file a copy of the 3 in Criminal Appeal No.3446 of 2023, arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No.11954 of 2023, titled as Aditi @ Mithi v. Jitesh Sharma last 25 judgments/orders, passed in the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C, needless to say, the orders shall be either deciding interim maintenance or final award of maintenance through Registrar General of this Court in a sealed cover.
10. Parting with the facts of the instance case, this is not the first case in which this Court has noticed non-compliance with the above-referred judgments. This Court has observed that circulations of judgments by the direction of Hon’ble Supreme Court on this Court have a little effect on the working of the trial Courts, despite regular training and sensitization programmes by the Judicial Training and Research Institute, Lucknow, it is out of the understanding of this Court why the Judicial Officers are failed to understand the consequences of non-compliance of the orders, passed by the Constitutional Courts even though, it is premature to come to any conclusion as of now. Therefore, this Court directs all the Principal Judge, Family Courts established under the territorial jurisdiction of this Court to file a compliance report in view of the Rajnesh v. Neha case (supra) and Smt. Parul Tyagi v. Gaurav Tyagi case (supra) in a sealed cover of their own Court along with all the Family Courts working under their supervision and control.
11. This Court feels compelled to express its concern about summoning such a report on the judicial side. This Court is aware that this action may negatively impact the morale of Judicial Officers. However, for the effective and consistent implementation of the Supreme Court’s directives, this Court has no option but to monitor the Family Courts so far as implementation of the judgments are concerned. Despite issuing numerous orders to the learned Principal Judge of Family Courts individually, widely circulating the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and conducting training programs by JTRI in Lucknow, as well as seminars on Family Court Sensitization by the Sensitization of Family Courts Committee, this Court have observed minimal impact in practice.
12. The Registrar (Compliance) shall transmit a copy of this order to all the Principal Judge, Family Court of Uttar Pradesh for effective and speedy compliance, and the report shall be submitted through the learned Registrar General of this Court in a sealed cover before this Court. Further, the Registrar General shall ensure compliance of the terms of this order both in letter in spirit.
13. Let this matter be placed before this Court on 10.06.2024 at 3:30 P.M.
Order Date :- 23.5.2024
A. Tripathi
Justice Vinod Diwakar