# Gaurav Mehta v. State of U.P. & Anr. Opp. Parties

- **Citation:** (2025) 12 ILRA 1243
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2025-12-08
- **Case number:** Application U/S 482 No. 33209 of 2023
- **Bench:** Vikram D. Chauhan
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/gaurav-mehta-v-state-of-u-p-anr-opp-parties-54825
- **Pages:** 24

## Text

_Characters 0–39,960 of 85,148. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39960 for what follows._

12 All. Gaurav Mehta Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1243
first, limitation to seek either or both those
remedies, starts running, simultaneously. If
no application is filed under Section 161 of
the Act to seek rectification (of a mistake in
such order), upto three months, the
limitation to seek rectification would expire
at the end of three months. In that case,
simultaneously, the normal period of
limitation to file first appeal against such
order would also have run continuously and
concurrently and, therefore, it would also
be exhausted, simultaneously. If, however,
before
expiry
of
three
months,
an
application is filed under Section 161 of the
Act, to seek rectification in that order, the
running of limitation (to file appeal against
such order), would be put in abeyance from
the date of filing of such application, upto
the date when that application is decided.

30. This leads us to the conclusion, to
apply the underlying principle of Section
14 Limitation Act, wherever an application
seeking rectification of mistake apparent on
the face of record may be filed within time,
as may have been done in the present case,
the application of the underlying principle
of Section 14 Limitation Act, may not be
examined with a microscope, any further.
To the extent that application is filed 'bona
fide' in 'good faith' and is pursued, that
principle would apply, without doubt. The
only exception to that principle may bewhere the application seeking rectification
of a mistake is itself filed beyond the
period of limitation prescribed under
Section 161 of the Act. There no such
benefit may arise. Here, that application
was filed within the time prescribed under
the said provisions.

31. To the extent, respondent no. 3
rejected that application, we find occasion
arose to the petitioner to claim benefit of
Section
14
of
the
Limitation
Act,
occasioned by the mistake on part of the
petitioner,
in
filing
that
application.
Consequentially, and without exception,
the duration of that application (filed by the
petitioner seeking rectification of mistake
in the adjudication order dated 23.4.2024),
having remained pending, has to be
excluded from the limitation to file appeal,
as running of limitation remained in
abeyance, during pendency of application
filed under Section 161 of the Act. Here,
that period must be excluded. Thus, the
appeal was filed within two months and
nine days from the date of the ex-parte
adjudication order. The period of limitation
being three months, the appeal filed was
well within limitation.

32. Consequently, the writ petition is
allowed. Accordingly, the order dated
23.04.2024 is set aside and the appeal is
restored to its original number and status.
We expect that the same would be dealt
with and decided strictly in accordance
with law on merits, expeditiously.

33. No order as to costs.
----------
(2025) 12 ILRA 1243
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 08.12.2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J.

Application U/S 482 No. 33209 of 2023

Gaurav Mehta ...Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. & Anr. ...Opp. Parties

ISSUE FOR CONSIDERATION
Whether the Applicant (husband) filing altered
ICICI
Bank
statements
in
maintenance
proceedings
amounts
to
forgery
under
Section 466 IPC, and whether the summoning
1244 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
order dated 17.10.2019 can be quashed under
Section 482 CrPC.

HEADNOTES
Criminal
Law
-
Code
of
Criminal
Procedure, 1973 - Sections 125, 91, 482 -
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 420,
463, 464, 466, 468, 471 - Hindu Marriage
Act, 1955 - Section 13B- Application
U/section 482 Cr.P.C. - filed for quashing of
summoning
order
and
entire
criminal
proceedings - marriage of Applicant & Opposite
Party No. 2 - matrimonial dispute arose -
divorce petition filed - divorce decree - parties
resided separately thereafter - however, wife
initiated
maintenance
proceedings
against
applicant under section 125 CrPC - trial court
directed husband (Applicant) to file last three
years' income tax returns, bank account details,
FD/bonds, movable assets, and salary slip -
interim order passed directing payment of Rs.
15,000/- per month towards maintenance till
son attains majority - husband submitted bank
statements - wife lodged FIR, alleging offence
of forgery u/s 466 IPC - allegations are that,
her husband filed forged/fabricated ICICI bank
statements in court to mislead - investigation
revealed variance between statements filed in
maintenance case and authentic ICICI records -
recovery of genuine statements showed missing
entries - charge sheet filed - trial court took
cognizance and issued summons - Applicant
challenged summoning order before High Court
- Court's finds that, filing forged/altered bank
statements in judicial proceedings is prima facie
forgery, - it gives unfair advantage and
undermines judicial integrity, - any attempt to
file forged documents before court is an insult
to majesty of law - Court held that, sufficient
grounds are exist for trial and hence summoning
order is valid - accordingly, application is
dismissed.(Para - 22, 29, 30, 31, 34)
Application Dismissed. (E-11)

CASE LAW CITED
Vimla v. Delhi Administration, AIR 1963 SC 1572
- Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) v.
Aafloat Textiles (I) Pvt. Ltd., (2009) 11 SCC 18 -
Vishnu Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P., 2020 (11)
ADJ 615 - State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992
SCC (Cri) 426 - Indian Bank v. Satyam Fibres
(India) Pvt. Ltd., (1996) 5 SCC 550 - Satish
Chandra Chatterji v. Kumar Satish Kantha Roy,
AIR 1923 PC 73.

LIST OF ACTS
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Indian Penal
Code, 1860 - Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

LIST OF KEYWORDS
Forgery,
False
Document,
Fraudulently,
Dishonestly,
Maintenance
Proceedings,
Summoning Order, Section 482 CrPC, Bank
Statement, Concealment of Income, Judicial
Integrity.

CASE ARISING FROM
Criminal Case No. 5043 of 2019 (State v. Gaurav
Mehta) - FIR No. 0869 of 2019, PS Surajpur,
Gautam Buddh Nagar - Summoning order dated
17.10.2019 by Second Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Gautam Buddh Naga.

APPEARANCE OF PARTIES
Counsel for Appellant: - Sri Ishir Sripat,
Counsel for Respondent: - Sri Anamika Chopra,
Shri O P Dwivedi, AGA.

(Delivered by Hon'ble Vikram D.
Chauhan, J.)

1. Heard Sri Ishir Sripat, learned
counsel for Applicant, Ms. Anamika
Chopra, Opposite party no. 2 appearing in
person and Sri O.P. Dwivedi, learned
A.G.A. for the State.

2. The present application under Section
482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is
preferred
by
Applicant
challenging
summoning order dated 17.10.2019 passed
by learned Second Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Gautam Buddh Nagar as well as
entire proceedings in pursuance to Criminal
Case No. 5043 of 2019 (State Vs. Gaurav
Mehta) under Section 466 of Indian Penal
Code,
Police
Station-Surajpur,
DistrictGautambudh Nagar in the court of Second
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam
Buddh Nagar.
12 All. Gaurav Mehta Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1245

3. The brief facts arising out of present
case are as under :-

a) The Applicant and Opposite
party no. 2, marriage was solemnized on
27.2.2004 at Noida.

b) Out of aforesaid wedlock, one
son namely Abhimanyu Mehta (renamed to
Aryaman Chopra) was born on 27.12.2004.
The Applicant and Opposite party no. 2,
resided as husband & wife till 16.8.2006
whereafter due to differences between the
parties, they approached the court of
District Judge, New Delhi and Divorce
Decree under Section 13B of Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955 was passed vide
Judgement and Decree dated 20.8.2007.

c) The Applicant and Opposite
party no. 2 thereafter resided separately and
the abovementioned son of parties resided
with Opposite party no. 2. Thereafter for
maintenance of said son, Opposite party no.
2 instituted Case No. 374 of 2013 (earlier
number being 50 of 2009) under Section
125 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
In the aforesaid application maintenance to
the tune of Rs.15,000/- per month was
claimed in respect of above-mentioned
child.

d) In the said application under
Section
125
of
Code
of
Criminal
Procedure, 1973, an order was passed by
court concerned on 26.2.2019 directing
Applicant to submit last three years income
tax return, bank account details, fixed
deposit or bond and other movable assets
and salary slip.

e) The Applicant in pursuance to
aforementioned order dated 26.2.2019 filed
his submissions before the court concerned
(where proceeding under Section 125
Cr.P.C. was pending, hereinafter referred to
as Maintenance Court) wherein the
statement of ICICI bank account for Year
2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14 was also
submitted before the Maintenance Court.
The Maintenance Court further by order
dated 30.4.2019 directed Applicant to
submit salary slip and details of immovable
property.

f) The Maintenance Court by
order
dated
21.11.2019
directed
the
Applicant to pay Rs. 15,000/- per month
towards maintenance of the son till he
attains majority.

g) The Opposite party no 2
thereafter lodged a zero first information
report
in
New
Delhi,
which
was
subsequently lodged on 22.7.2019 as Case
Crime No. 0869 of 2019 at Police Station
Surajpur, District-Gautam Buddh Nagar,
under Sections 420, 468 and 471 of Indian
Penal Code against Applicant. In the
above-mentioned first information report, it
is alleged that informant was engaged in
child maintenance litigation with Applicant
for almost 10 years and Applicant had
refused to maintain his own son. By order
dated
26.2.2019
passed
by
the
A.S.J./F.T.C., Gautam Buddh Nagar, the
court had ordered for production of
documents in respect of Applicant being
bank statements and details of immovable
property, fixed deposits, shares, bonds and
other related financial documents before
the next date of hearing. In response to
above-mentioned order dated 26.2.2019,
Applicant filed bank statement of ICICI
bank account for time period 2011-12,
2012-13, 2013-14 along with affidavit
stating that Applicant owned no vehicle or
any other immovable assets. The ICICI
Bank statement filed by Applicant for
above-mentioned financial years are forged
and fabricated document submitted by
Applicant in order to mislead the court into
believing that his income is far less than the
actual. The Applicant further concealed
information of his financial relationship
with ICICI bank besides the saving bank
1246 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
account. The informant inquired and came
to know that bank statement filed by
Applicant does not conform to format in
which bank statement issued by ICICI
bank. The statement submitted in the court
does not have ICICI bank stamp and
authorised signature, making it evident that
the documents are fabricated. It is also
alleged that complaint was made to the
DCP, Parliament Street, New Delhi as the
master data shows that the head office of
bank is at Barakhamba Road, New Delhi.
During the course of enquiry, the police
obtained bank statement of said account
from ICICI Bank. On perusal of bank
statement
filed
by
Applicant
before
Maintenance Court and account statement
obtained from ICICI Bank, it came to light
that various entries were deleted from bank
statement
that
was
submitted
in
Maintenance Court in order to conceal his
correct income and mislead the court and
on account of aforesaid, the application of
informant under Section 91 of Cr.P.C. was
rejected by court concerned.

h)
The
Investigating
Officer
thereafter has recorded the statement of the
informant under Section 161 of Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 on 22.7.2019
wherein the informant has supported the
prosecution case.

i)
The
Investigating
Officer
thereafter submitted the charge-sheet dated
23.9.2019 under Section 466 of Indian
Penal Code against the Applicant and
thereafter the court concerned by impugned
order dated 17.10.2019, summoned the
Applicant for offence under Section 466 of
Indian Penal Code.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel
for Applicant that Applicant is being
proceeded and summoned under Section
466 I.P.C. by the impugned summoning
order dated 17.10.2019. Learned counsel
for
Applicant
further
submits
that
Applicant and Opposite party no. 2 were
husband & wife and divorce order was
passed on 20.08.2007. Learned counsel for
Applicant further submits that out of said
wedlock, one son was born. An application
was filed by Opposite party no. 2 on behalf
of minor child for maintenance under
Section 125 Cr.P.C. on 11.9.2009. In the
aforesaid application an order was passed
on 26.2.2019 directing the Applicant to
produce statement of last three years i.e.
from the date of order dated 26.2.2019.
Learned counsel for Applicant further
submits that in pursuance to the aforesaid
order, statements were submitted which is
annexed at page no. 164 of paper book
wherein paragraph no. 7, the statement of
account for the years 2011-12, 2012-13 and
2013-14 were submitted. Learned counsel
for Applicant further submits that the said
document were only the excerpts of
statement of account and actual statement
of account are submitted before this Court.
The documents including the statement of
bank entries is from page no. 72 of the
paper book. It is submitted that the
aforesaid application under Section 125
Cr.P.C. was allowed by order dated
21.11.2019 granting maintenance of Rs.
15,000/- per month to the child. The claim
in the application under Section 125
Cr.P.C. itself was in respect of Rs. 15,000/-
per month which was allowed in toto.

5. Learned counsel for Applicant
further submits that since last three years
statement of account was not submitted and
order was passed on 30.4.2019 directing
Applicant to submit the salary slip which
was
submitted.
Learned
counsel
for
Applicant further submits that it is not in
dispute that the alleged statement of
account
filed
before
the
Magistrate
concerned (Maintenance Court), which is at
12 All. Gaurav Mehta Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1247
page no. 72 of paper book, was not the
exact copy of statement of account received
by the Investigating Officer from the ICICI
Bank and there are some missing debit and
credit entries. However, learned counsel for
Applicant further submits that for the
purpose of Section 466 of IPC read with
Section 463 I.P.C., forgery would lie if
there is any wrongful gain/wrongful loss or
dishonest intention. Learned counsel for
Applicant further submits that there was no
wrongful gain or wrongful loss to any of
the
parties
as
Section
125
Cr.P.C.
application was finalised in favour of the
son of Applicant and as such the present
proceedings are not maintainable. Learned
counsel for Applicant has also relied upon
the judgments of the Supreme Court in
Vimla Vs. Delhi Administration, AIR
1963 SC 1572, Commissioner of Customs
(Preventive) Vs. Aafloat Textiles (I) Pvt.
Ltd. and Ors., (2009) 11 SCC 18 and
Vishnu Kumar Gupta and Ors. Vs. State
of U.P. and Ors., 2020 (11) ADJ 615. It is
further submitted that in view of judgments
of Supreme Court the present criminal
proceedings would not be tenable unless
the finding is recorded that there was any
wrongful loss or wrongful gain to any of
the parties. Learned counsel for Applicant
further submits that perusal of summoning
order would go to show that same is on the
printed proforma which is in teeth of the
judgment of the Supreme Court in Vishnu
Kumar Gupta (supra).

6. The Opposite party no. 2 appearing
in person submits that it is not in dispute
between the parties that statement of
account submitted by the Applicant before
the Magistrate concerned under Section
125 Cr.P.C. were not the same statement of
account
as
was
recovered
by
the
Investigating Officer during investigation.
The Opposite party no. 2 further submits
that debit and credit entries were missing
and in the aforesaid entries some of entries
pertain to transfer of amount to another
bank account and by deleting the reference
to the aforesaid entries in statement of
account submitted before the Maintenance
Court, the Applicant has tried to mislead
and deceive in judicial proceedings.

7. The Opposite party no. 2 further
submits that maintenance proceedings in
respect of minor child travelled for ten
years on account of all these activities by
Applicant. The maintenance petition was
finally decided after giving 177 dates and
in the year 2019 only final documents were
submitted which was also incorrect. It is
also submitted by Opposite party no. 2 that
the present application under Section 482
Cr.P.C. would not be maintainable in view
of the law laid down by the Supreme Court
in State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992
SCC (Cri) 426, the present case does not
fall in any of the parameters of Bhajan Lal
(supra) case.

8. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the
prayer made by learned counsel for
Applicant and submits that there was
difference in the statement of account
recovered by the Investigating Officer and
the statement of account which Applicant
had submitted before the Maintenance
Court and on the aforesaid basis charge
sheet has been submitted under Section 466
I.P.C. and the court concerned has not erred
in law in issuing the summoning order.

9. The present Applicant is summoned
by order dated 17.10.2019 under Section
466 of Indian Penal Code. The first
information report was lodged by Opposite
party no. 2 at Police Station-Surajpur,
District-Gautam Budhnagar under Sections
420, 468, 471 of Indian Penal Code against
1248 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
the Applicant. In the above-mentioned first
information report it is alleged that
Informant-Opposite
party
no.
2
was
engaged in child maintenance litigation
with Applicant for almost ten years and the
Applicant had refused to maintain his own
son. By order dated 26.2.2019 passed by
A.S.J./F.T.C., Gautam Budh Nagar, the
court had ordered for production of
documents in respect of Applicant's bank
details/statements and details of immovable
property, fixed deposits, shares, bonds and
other related financial documents before
the next date of hearing. In response to
above-mentioned order dated 26.2.2019,
Applicant filed bank statement from ICICI
Bank account for time period 2011-12,
2012-13, 2013-14 along with affidavit
stating that Applicant owned no vehicle or
any other immovable assets. The ICICI
Bank statement filed by Applicant for
above-mentioned financial years is a forged
and fabricated document and has been
made by Applicant in order to mislead the
court into believing that his income is far
less than actual. The Applicant further
concealed information of his financial
relationship with ICICI Bank besides the
saving
bank
account.
The
informant
inquired and came to know that the bank
statement filed by Applicant does not
conform to format in which bank statement
is issued by ICICI Bank. The statement
submitted in the court does not have ICICI
Bank stamp and authorised signature
making
evident
that
documents
are
fabricated. It is also alleged that the
complaint
was
made
to
the
DCP,
Parliament Street, New Delhi as the Master
data shows that the head office of the bank
is at Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. During
the course of enquiry, the police obtained
bank statement of the said account from the
ICICI Bank. On perusal of the bank
statement
filed
by
Applicant
before
Maintenance
Court
and
the
account
statement obtained from ICICI Bank, it
came to light that various entries were
deleted from bank statement that was
submitted in the Maintenance Court in
order to conceal Applicant's correct income
and mislead the court and on account of
aforesaid, the application of informant
under section 91 of Cr.P.C. was rejected by
Maintenance Court.

10. The Applicant and Opposite party
No. 2 were married on 27.2.2004 at Noida.
Out of the said wedlock a child was born
on 27.12.2004. A Divorce Decree was
passed by the court of District Judge, Delhi
by Judgement and Decree dated 20.8.2007
passed in H.M.A. No 483 of 2007.
Thereafter, the Applicant and Opposite
party no. 2 are residing separately,
however, the son is residing with Opposite
party no. 2. The Opposite party no. 2
thereafter instituted Case No. 374 of 2013
(earlier number 50 of 2009) under Section
125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for
maintenance of the above-mentioned son.

11. In the above-mentioned case on
26.2.2019, the court concerned (before
whom the maintenance proceedings were
pending) directed the Applicant to file his
last three years income tax returns, current
bank account details along with details of
other assets. The above-mentioned order
dated 26.2.2019 passed by Maintenance
Court is quoted hereinbelow:-

"याहचका संख्या 374/2013
आयथमन बनाम गौरव
U/S-125 Cr.P.C.

26.02.2019

पत्राविी आज पेश हुई। 36 ग व 52ग प्रािानापत्र
पर उियपक्ष के भवद्वान अभधवक्ता को पूवा में ुना जा चुका है व
पत्राविी आिेश हेतु भनयत है।
12 All. Gaurav Mehta Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1249

प्रािानापत्र 36 ग द्वारा वािी अन्तगात धारा-91
ििं०प्र० िं० के तहत भवपक्षी े प्रािानापत्र में वभिात प्रपत्र को तिब
करने हेतु प्रस्तुत भकया गया है। भवपक्षी द्वारा आपभत्त िाभखि की गयी
है तिा प्रािानापत्र 52ग द्वारा वािी माननीय उच्च न्यायािय के
आिेश भिनािंक 18.4.16 का अनुपािन कराने हेतु प्रस्तुत भकया
गया है। भवपक्षी द्वारा आपभत्त िाभखि की गयी है।

 ुना तिा प्रपत्रों का अविोकन भकया।

पत्राविी के अविोकन े भवभित होता है भक यह
वाि वाभिनी द्वारा अपने पुत्र के िरि-पोर्ि हेतु योभजत भकया गया
है। धारा 125 ििं०प्र० िं० के वाि में भवपक्षी की इनकम े िंबिंभधत
 ाक्ष्य पत्राविी पर आना आवश्यक है ताभक उभचत आिेश पाररत
भकया जा के। अतः भवपक्षी को आिेभशत भकया जाता है भक वह
भपििे तीन वर्ा का इनकम टैक् ररटना, बैंक खाते े म्बभन्धत
भववरि, भफक् एफडी, शेयर व बािंड आभि प्रपत्रों को तिा अपनी
अचि म्पभत्त े िंबिंभधत प्रपत्र व ैिरी भस्िप िाभखि करे तिा
भवपक्षी को यह िी आिेभशत भकया जाता है भक प्रा०प० 52ग के
पररप्रेक्ष्य में वह माननीय उच्च न्यायािय के आिेश भिनािंक
18.4.16 का अनुपािन अक्षरतः करे तिा जो िी शेर् धनराभश
वािी की है उ े अन्िर एक माह अिा करना ुभनभश्चत करे। चूिंभक
वाि काफी पुराना है। अतः पक्षकारों को आिेभशत भकया जाता है भक
वे वाि के भनस्तारि में भविम्ब नहीं करेंगे। पत्राविी वास्ते ुनवाई
7.3.19 को पेश हो।

अभतररक्त प्रधान न्यायाधीश/पररवार न्यायािय
गौतमबुद्धनगर।

12. In pursuance to the abovementioned order dated 26.2.2019, the
Applicant filed his submissions dated
4.4.2019 before the Maintenance Court
annexing the documents. The submission
along with the documents have been filed
by Applicant before the court, which is
annexed at page 64 of the paper book. The
paragraph no. 7 of the above-mentioned
submission (submitted by the Applicant
before the Maintenance Court) is quoted
hereinbelow :-

"7. That in Compliance of the
order of this Hon'ble Court Bank account
statement of ICICI bearing 025001517104
(Salary Savings account) 2011-12, 201213, 2013-14. Further respondent has no
investment in shares and bonds, no vehicle
in ownership, no title deed of any
immovable asset in ownership."

13. A perusal of above-mentioned
paragraph no. 7 of submission (submitted
by Applicant before the court where the
maintenance proceedings were pending)
would go to show that Applicant had
submitted before Maintenance Court, the
statement of ICICI Bank for the years
2011-12, 2012-12, 2013-14. The aforesaid
statements are annexed along with the 482
application before this Court from page no.
72 of paper book. Although before this
Court the Applicant in paragraph no. 10 of
application under Section 482 Cr.P.C,
1973, has stated that he had filed before the
court concerned along with the submissions
excerpts of salary account for the abovementioned years.

14.
The
statement
of
account
submitted
by
Applicant
before
the
Maintenance Court annexed at page no. 72
of paper book, which contains the logo of
bank
and
starts
with
the
heading
DETAILED
STATEMENT.
The
Applicant has filed along with paper book
from page no. 209 of present application,
the statement of account of ICICI Bank
before this Court for the period 1.4.2011 to
1.7.2011, 1.7.2011 to 1.10.2011, 1.10.2011
to 31.12.2011, 1.1.2012 to 31.3.2012,
1.4.2012
to
1.7.2012,
1.7.2012
to
1.10.2012,
1.10.2012
to
31.12.2012,
1.1.2013
to
31.3.2013,
1.4.2013
to
1.7.2013, 1.4.2014 to 1.7.2014, 1.7.2014 to
1.10.2014, 1.10.2014 to 31.12.2014 and
1.1.2015 to 31.1.2015.

15. A comparison of statement of
account of ICICI Bank submitted by
Applicant before the Maintenance Court
1250 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
(which is at page no. 72 of the paper book)
and statement of account of ICICI Bank
submitted by Investigating Officer with
charge sheet (which is annexed at page 209
of
the
paper
book),
the
following
differences are noted :-

(a) The statement of account filed
by Applicant before Maintenance Court
(which is annexed at page no. 72 of paper
book) was for the period from 1.4.2011 to
31.3.2012. The aforesaid statement at page
no. 72 of paper book discloses to be a
detailed statement carrying the logo of
ICICI Bank. The aforesaid statement of
account although is for the period from
1.4.2011 to 31.3.2012, however, the actual
entry is in the said statement of account
starts from 27.4.2011. Although in the
statement of account filed before this Court
(at page no. 209 of the paper book) for the
period from 1.4.2011 to 1.7.2011 reflects
two withdrawals one of which is of
4.4.2011 of Rs. 18,000/- and the other entry
of the same date of withdrawal in the
favour of Applicant of Rs. 1,00,000/-. The
aforesaid two entries of the date 4.4.2011 is
not reflected in the statement of account
submitted before the court concerned (in
maintenance proceedings).

(b) The statement of account filed
by Applicant before Maintenance Court
(which is annexed at page no. 72 of paper
book) was for period from 1.4.2011 to
31.3.2012. The aforesaid statement (which
is annexed at page no. 72 of the paper
book),
discloses
to
be
a
"detailed
statement" carrying the logo of the ICICI
Bank. The statement of account of ICICI
Bank filed by Applicant before this Court
(which is annexed at page no. 209 of the
paper book) shows an entry of withdrawal
dated 4.5.2011 of Rs. 60,000/- in favour of
Applicant, however, the aforesaid entry of
Rs. 60,000/- does not find place in the
statement of account filed before the
Maintenance Court.

(c) The statement of account filed
by Applicant before the Maintenance Court
(which is annexed at page no. 72 of paper
book) was for the period from 1.4.2011 to
31.3.2012.
The
aforesaid
statement
annexed at page no. 72 of paper book
discloses to be a "detailed statement"
carrying the logo of ICICI Bank. The
statement of account of ICICI Bank filed
before this Court, which is annexed at page
no. 209 of paper book, shows an entry of
withdrawal dated 4.5.2011 of Rs. 46,054/-,
however, the aforesaid entry of Rs.
46,054/- does not find place in aforesaid
statement of account which is annexed at
page no. 72 of the paper book filed by
Applicant before the Maintenance Court.

(d) The statement of account filed
by Applicant before Maintenance Court
(which is annexed at page no. 72 of paper
book) was for the period from 1.4.2011 to
31.3.2012. The aforesaid statement (which
is annexed at page no. 72 of the paper
book) discloses to be a "detailed statement"
carrying the logo of ICICI Bank. The
statement of account of ICICI Bank filed
before this Court (which is annexed at page
no. 209 of paper book) shows an entry of
withdrawal
dated
4.5.2011
of
Rs.
1,00,000/-, however, the aforesaid entry of
Rs. 1,00,000/- does not find place in
aforesaid statement of account, which is
annexed at page no. 72 of the paper book
filed
by
the
Applicant
before
the
Maintenance Court.

(e) The statement of account filed
by Applicant before the Maintenance Court
(which is annexed at page no. 72 of paper
book) was for the period from 1.4.2011 to
31.3.2012. The aforesaid statement (which
is annexed at page no. 72 of the paper
book) discloses to be a "detailed statement"
carrying the logo of ICICI Bank. The
12 All. Gaurav Mehta Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1251
statement of the account of ICICI Bank
filed before this Court (which is annexed at
page no. 209 of paper book) shows an entry
of deposit dated 1.7.2011 of Rs. 3,63,353/-,
however, the aforesaid entry of Rs.
3,63,353/- does not find place in the
aforesaid statement of account (which is
annexed at page no. 73 of the paper book),
filed by Applicant before the court
concerned (in maintenance proceedings).

(f) The statement of account filed
by Applicant before Maintenance Court
(which is annexed at page no. 72 of paper
book) was for the period from 1.4.2011 to
31.3.2012. The aforesaid statement (which
is annexed at page no. 72 of the paper
book) discloses to be a "detailed statement"
carrying the logo of ICICI Bank. The
statement of account of ICICI Bank filed
before this Court at page no. 209 of paper
book shows an entry of withdrawal dated
1.7.2011 of Rs. 1,00,000/- (in favour of
Applicant), however, the aforesaid entry of
Rs. 1,00,000/- does not find place in the
aforesaid statement of account which is
annexed at page no. 73 of the paper book
filed by Applicant before court concerned
(in maintenance proceedings).

(g) The statement of account
filed by Applicant before Maintenance
Court (which is annexed at page 72 of
paper book) was for period from 1.4.2011
to 31.3.2012. The aforesaid statement
which is annexed at page no. 72 of the
paper book discloses to be a "detailed
statement" carrying the logo of bank. The
statement of account of ICICI Bank filed
before this Court (which is annexed at
page no. 211 of paper book), shows an
entry of withdrawal dated 4.7.2011 of Rs.
1,00,000/- (in favour of Applicant),
however, the aforesaid entry of Rs.
1,00,000/-
does
not
find
place
in
aforesaid statement of account (which is
annexed at page no. 73 of the paper book)
filed by Applicant before the court
concerned (in maintenance proceedings).

(h) The statement of account
filed by Applicant before Maintenance
Court (which is annexed at page no. 72 of
paper book) was for period from 1.4.2011
to 31.3.2012. The aforesaid statement,
which is annexed at page no. 72 of the
paper book, discloses to be a "detailed
statement" carrying the logo of the bank.
The statement of account of ICICI Bank
filed before this Court (which is annexed
at page no. 211 of paper book) shows an
entry of withdrawal dated 4.7.2011 of Rs.
1,00,000/- (in favour of Applicant),
however, the aforesaid entry of Rs.
1,00,000/- does not find place in the
aforesaid statement of account (which is
annexed at page no. 73 of the paper book)
filed by the Applicant before the court
concerned (in maintenance proceedings).

(i) The statement of account
filed by Applicant before Maintenance
Court (which is annexed at page no. 72 of
paper book) was for period from 1.4.2011
to 31.3.2012. The aforesaid statement
which is annexed at page no. 72 of paper
book
discloses
to
be
a
"detailed
statement" carrying the logo of bank. The
statement of account of ICICI Bank filed
before this Court (which is annexed at
page no. 211 of paper book) shows an
entry of withdrawal dated 4.7.2011 of Rs.
50,000/-
(in
favour
of
Applicant),
however, the aforesaid entry of Rs
50,000/- does not find place in aforesaid
statement of account, which is annexed at
page no. 73 of the paper book, filed by
the Applicant before the court concerned
(in maintenance proceedings).

(j) The statement of account filed
by Applicant before Maintenance Court
(which is annexed at page no. 72 of paper
book) was for period from 1.4.2011 to
31.3.2012. The aforesaid statement, which
1252 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
is annexed at page no. 72 of paper book,
discloses to be a "detailed statement"
carrying the logo of bank. The statement of
account of ICICI Bank filed before this
Court (which is annexed at page no. 211 of
paper book) shows an entry of withdrawal
dated 8.8.2011 of Rs. 18,000/- , however,
the aforesaid entry of Rs. 18,000/- does not
find place in aforesaid statement of account
(which is annexed at page no. 73 of the
paper book) filed by Applicant before the
court
concerned
(in
maintenance
proceedings).

(k) The statement of account filed
by Applicant before Maintenance Court
(which is annexed at page no. 72 of paper
book) was for period from 1.4.2011 to
31.3.2012. The aforesaid statement, which
is annexed at page no. 72 of paper book,
discloses to be a "detailed statement"
carrying the logo of the bank. The
statement of account of ICICI Bank filed
before this Court (which is annexed at page
no. 211 of paper book) shows an entry of
withdrawal dated 24.8.2011 of Rs. 17,368/-
, however, the aforesaid entry of Rs.
17,368/- does not find place in aforesaid
statement of account (which is annexed at
page no. 73 of the paper book) filed by
Applicant before the court concerned (in
maintenance proceedings).

(l) The statement of account filed
by the Applicant before Maintenance Court
(which is annexed at page no. 72 of paper
book) was for the period from 1.4.2011 to
31.3.2012. The aforesaid statement, which
is annexed at page no. 72 of paper book,
discloses to be a "detailed statement"
carrying the logo of bank. The statement of
account of ICICI Bank filed before this
Court (which is annexed at page no. 211 of
paper book) shows an entry of withdrawal
dated 1.9.2011 of Rs. 50,000/-, however,
the aforesaid entry of Rs. 50,000/- does not
find place in aforesaid statement of account
(which is annexed at page no. 74 of the
paper book) filed by Applicant before the
court
concerned
(in
maintenance
proceedings).

(m) The statement of account
filed by Applicant before Maintenance
Court (which is annexed at page no. 72 of
paper book) was for the period from
1.4.2011 to 31.3.2012. The aforesaid
statement, which is annexed at page no. 72
of the paper book, discloses to be a
"detailed statement" carrying the logo of
bank. The statement of account of ICICI
Bank filed before this Court (which is
annexed at page no. 211 of paper book)
shows an entry of deposit dated 1.9.2011 of
Rs. 471/-, however, the aforesaid entry of
Rs. 471/- does not find place in aforesaid
statement of account (which is annexed at
page no. 74 of the paper book) filed by the
Applicant before the court concerned (in
maintenance proceedings).

(n) The statement of account filed
by Applicant before Maintenance Court
(which is annexed at page no. 72 of paper
book) was for period from 1.4.2011 to
31.3.2012. The aforesaid statement, which
is annexed at page no. 72 of paper book,
discloses to be a "detailed statement"
carrying the logo of bank. The statement of
account of ICICI Bank filed before this
Court (which is annexed at page no. 211 of
paper book) shows an entry of withdrawal
dated 12.9.2011 of Rs.46,000/- however,
the aforesaid entry of Rs. 46,000/- does not
find place in aforesaid statement of account
(which is annexed at page no. 74 of paper
book) filed by Applicant before the court
concerned (in maintenance proceedings).

(o) The statement of account filed
by Applicant before Maintenance Court
(which is annexed at page no. 72 of paper
book) was for period from 1.4.2011 to
31.3.2012. The aforesaid statement, which
is annexed at page no. 72 of paper book,
12 All. Gaurav Mehta Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1253
discloses to be a "detailed statement"
carrying the logo of bank. The statement of
account of ICICI Bank filed before this
Court (which is annexed at page no. 211 of
paper book) shows an entry of deposit
dated
29.9.2011
of
Rs.
1,88,957/-,
however, the aforesaid entry of Rs.
1,88,957/- does not find place in the
aforesaid statement of account (which is
annexed at page 74 of paper book) filed by
Applicant before the court concerned (in
maintenance proceedings).

(p) The statement of account filed
by Applicant before Maintenance Court
(which is annexed at page no. 72 of paper
book) was for period from 1.4.2011 to
31.3.2012. The aforesaid statement, which
is annexed at page no. 72 of paper book,
discloses to be a "detailed statement"
carrying the logo of bank. The statement of
account of ICICI Bank filed before this
Court (which is annexed at page no. 213 of
paper book) shows an entry of withdrawal
dated
7.10.2011
of
Rs.
2,00,000/-,
however, aforesaid entry of Rs. 2,00,000/-
does not find place in aforesaid statement
of account (which is annexed at page no. 74
of paper book) filed by Applicant before
the court concerned (in maintenance
proceedings).

(q) The statement of account filed
by Applicant before Maintenance Court
(which is annexed at page no. 72 of paper
book) was for period from 1.4.2011 to
31.3.2012. The aforesaid statement, which
is annexed at page 72 of the paper book,
discloses to be a "detailed statement"
carrying the logo of bank. The statement of
account of ICICI Bank filed before this
Court (which is annexed at page no. 213 of
paper book) shows an entry of withdrawal
dated 31.10.2011 of Rs. 75,000/-, however,
aforesaid entry of Rs. 75,000/- does not
find place in the aforesaid statement of
account (which is annexed at page no. 74 of
the paper book) filed by Applicant before
the court concerned (in maintenance
proceedings).

(r) The statement of account filed
by Applicant before Maintenance Court
(which is annexed at page no. 72 of paper
book) was for period from 1.4.2011 to
31.3.2012. The aforesaid statement, which
is annexed at page no. 72 of the paper
book, discloses to be a "detailed statement"
carrying the logo of bank. The statement of
account of ICICI Bank filed before this
Court, which is annexed at page no. 213 of
paper book, shows an entry of withdrawal
dated 10.11.2011 of Rs. 37,000/-, however,
the aforesaid entry of Rs. 37,000/- does not
find place in aforesaid statement of account
(which is annexed at page no. 74 of the
paper book) filed by Applicant before the
court
concerned
(in
maintenance
proceedings).

(s) The statement of account filed
by Applicant before Maintenance Court
(which is annexed at page no. 72 of paper
book) was for the period from 1.4.2011 to
31.3.2012. The aforesaid statement, which
is annexed at page no. 72 of paper book
discloses to be a "detailed statement"
carrying the logo of bank. The statement of
account of ICICI bank filed before this
Court (which is annexed at page no. 213 of
paper book) shows an entry of withdrawal
dated 12.11.2011 of Rs. 50,000/-, however,
aforesaid entry of Rs. 50,000/- does not
find place in the aforesaid statement of
account (which is annexed at page no. 74 of
paper book) filed by Applicant before the
court
concerned
(in
maintenance
proceedings).

(t) The statement of account filed
by Applicant before Maintenance Court
(which is annexed at page no. 72 of paper
book) was for the period from 1.4.2011 to
31.3.2012. The aforesaid statement, which
is annexed at page no. 72 of paper book,
1254 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
discloses to be a "detailed statement"
carrying logo of bank. The statement of
account of ICICI Bank filed before this
Court, which is annexed at page no. 213 of
paper book shows an entry of withdrawal
dated 8.12.2011 of Rs. 18,000/-, however,
aforesaid entry of Rs. 18,000/- does not
find place in aforesaid statement of account
(which is annexed at page no. 75 of paper
book) filed by Applicant before court
concerned (in maintenance proceedings).

(u) The statement of account filed
by Applicant before Maintenance Court
(which is annexed at page no. 72 of paper
book) was for the period from 1.4.2011 to
31.3.2012. The aforesaid statement, which
is annexed at page no. 72 of paper book,
discloses to be a "detailed statement"
carrying the logo of bank. The statement of
account of ICICI Bank filed before this
Court (which is annexed at page no. 213 of
paper book) shows an entry of withdrawal
dated 8.12.2011 of Rs. 1,000/-, however,
the aforesaid entry of Rs.