# Samaydin v. State of U.P. and another

- **Citation:** (2001) 1 ILRA 353
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2000-09-08
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/samaydin-v-state-of-u-p-and-another-39734
- **Pages:** 2

## Text

INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2001
353
remanded to judicial custody for the first
time on 08.09.2000 and second remand on
the expiry of 14 days was granted by the
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad. The
relevant period for the purposes of
proviso of Section 167 (2) Cr. P.C. shall
be counted from the date of first remand
to judicial custody and not drawn
subsequent or second remand.

9. In this way, the right of accused
to be enlarged on bail under the proviso to
Section 167 (2) Cr. P.C. accrued on
09.12.2000 and he availed that right
12.12.2000, by which date, no charge
sheet was filed. The passing of the order
on the bail application on 14.12.2000 has
no effect as held by the Apex court in the
case of Mohammad Iqbal Madar Sheikh
and other (supra). Therefore, the accused
in entitled to bail under the proviso the
Section 167 (2) Cr. P.C.

10. Let the accused applicant
Bijendra @ Pintoo involved in case crime
no. 820 of 2000 under Section 364/302/34
I.P.C., P.C. Lone, District Ghaziabad be
enlarged on bail on his furnishing a
personal bond and two sureties each in the
like amount to the satisfaction of Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad.
Application Allowed.

25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21
25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21
&,9,/ 6,'(
&,9,/ 6,'(
'$7(' $//$+$%$'
'$7(' $//$+$%$'
%()25(
%()25(
7+( +21·%/(
7+( +21·%/( 6. $*$5:$/ -
6. $*$5:$/ -

&LYLO 0LVF $SSOLFDWLRQ 1R RI

6DPD\GLQ
«3HWLWLRQHU
9HUVXV
6WDWH RI 83 DQG RWKHUV «5HVSRQGHQWV

&RXQVHO IRU WKH 3HWLWLRQHU
6KUL 6XQLO .XPDU
&RXQVHO IRU WKH 5HVSRQGHQWV
$*$

&RGH RI &ULPLQDO 3URFHGXUH 6
 ± 0DLQWHQDQFH *UDQW RI WR ZLIH ±
IURP
GDWH
RI
DSSOLFDWLRQ
±
ZLWKRXW
UHFRUGLQJ DQ\ UHDVRQV ± 2UGHU LOOHJDO
+HOG ± 3DUD
)URP DQ H[DPLQDWLRQ RI WKH ODQJXDJH RI
VXEVHFWLRQ RI VHFWLRQ LW FOHDUO\
IROORZV WKDW LQ QRUPDO FLUFXPVWDQFHV WKH
PDLQWHQDQFH PXVW EH JUDQWHG IURP WKH
GDWH RI WKH RUGHU ,1 RQO\ H[WUDRUGLQDU\
FLUFXPVWDQFHV LW PD\ DOVR EH RUGHUHG WR
EH SDLG IURP WKH GDWH RI DSSOLFDWLRQ IRU
PDLQWHQDQFH ,W LV WKXV FOHDU WKDW WKHUH
PXVW
EH
D
GLVFXVVLRQ
RI
VXFK
FLUFXPVWDQFHV ZKLFK ZDUUDQW WKH FRXUW
WR DOORZ LW IURP WKH GDWH RI DSSOLFDWLRQ
1R RWKHU LQIHUHQFH LV SHUPLVVLEOH IURP
WKH ODQJXDJH RI VXEVHFWLRQ 2QH
VXFK H[WUD RUGLQDU\ FLUFXPVWDQFHV PD\
GLODWRU\
WDFWLFV
DGKHUHG
WR
E\
WKH
KXVEDQG
LQ
WKH
GLVSRVDO
RI
WKH
SURFHHGLQJ 7KH RWKHU RQH PD\ XQWROG
FUXHOW\ SUDFWLVHG DJDLQVW KLV ZLIH 7KH
OHDUQHG
0DJLVWUDWH
GDWH
RI
WKH
DSSOLFDWLRQ
1R
ZKHUH
LQ
MXGJHPHQW
EHIRUH GHOLYHULQJ WKH RSHUDWLYH SRUWLRQ
KH KDG VKRZQ DQ\ VXFK LQFOLQDWLRQ $V D
PDWWHU RI IDFW WKH FRXUW KDV WDNHQ WKH
KXVEDQG E\ VXUSULVH E\ PDNLQJ VXFK D
GLUHFWLRQ
IRU
WKH
ILUVW
WLPH
LQ
WKH
RSHUDWLYH SRUWLRQ RI WKH MXGJHPHQW ,
DP XQGHU WKH FLUFXPVWDQFHV LQFOLQHG WR
DFFHSW WKLV FRQWHQWLRQ DQG PRGLI\ WKH
RUGHU DQG PDNH LW SD\DEOH IURP WKH GDWH
RI RUGHU 7KH PDLQWHQDQFH DOORZDQFH
VKDOO EH SD\DEOH IURP WKH GDWH RI WKH
RUGHU

By the Court
1. Heard learned counsel for the
applicant and learned A.G.A. Sri Anoop
Ghosh and have perused bot the orders
also.
1All] Samaydin V. State of U.P. and another
354
2. The order of the learned Judicial
Magistrate granting maintenance of Rs.
500/- to the respondent from the date of
the application has been modified by the
learned IX Additional Sessions Judge,
Bulandshahr, only to extent of reducing
the amount from Rs. 500/- to Rs. 400/-.

3. On examination of both the
judgements, I do not find any serious
infirmity in them nor any such infirmity
was pointed out on behalf of the
applicant.
It
is
only
urged
that
maintenance amount should be fixed from
the date of the order as the law normally
requires. If the court intends to grant
maintenance from the date of application
court must record its reasons for doing so.
The contention has some force. Subsection (2) of Section 125, Cr.P.C. spells
as under :

"(2)
Such
allowance
shall
be
payable from the date of the order, or, if
so ordered from the date of the
application for maintenance."

4. From an examination of the
language of sub-section (2) of Section 125
it
clearly
follows
that
in
normal
circumstances the maintenance must be
granted from the date of the order. In only
extra-ordinary circumstances it may also
be ordered to be paid from the date of the
application for maintenance. It is thus
clear that there must be a discussion of
such circumstances which warrant the
court to allow it from the date of
application.
No
other
inference
is
permissible from the language of subsection(2).
One
such
extraordinary
circumstances may be dilatory tactics
adhered to by the husband in the disposal
of the proceeding. The other one may be
untold cruelty practised against his wife.
No extensive ground can be formulated
justify. The learned Magistrate has not
given
any
reason
for
allowing
maintenance
from
the
date
of
the
application. No where in judgement
before delivering the operative portion he
had shown any such inclination. As a
matter of fact the court has taken the
husband by surprise by making such
direction for the first time in the operative
portion of the judgement. I am under the
circumstances, inclined to accept this
contention and modify the order and make
it payable from the date of order. The
maintenance allowance shall be payable
from the date of the order.

Accordingly this application is partly
allowed.

Partly Allowed.

25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21
25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21
&,9,/ 6,'(
&,9,/ 6,'(
'$7(' $//$+$%$'
'$7(' $//$+$%$'
%()25(
%()25(
7+( +21·%/( 6+,7/$ 3' 65,9$67$9$
7+( +21·%/( 6+,7/$ 3' 65,9$67$9$

&LYLO 0LVF :ULW 3HWLWLRQ 1R RI

.XQM %HKDUL
«3HWLWLRQHU
9HUVXV
%RDUG RI 5HYHQXH 83 /XFNQRZ DQG
RWKHUV
«5HVSRQGHQWV

&RXQVHO IRU WKH 3HWLWLRQHU
6KUL %ULM %KXVKDQ 3DXO
&RXQVHO IRU WKH 5HVSRQGHQWV
6KUL 1 % 7HZDUL
6KUL 3. 5HVDULD
6KUL -1 0LVKUD

&RQVWLWXWLRQ RI ,QGLD $UWLFOHV UHDG
ZLWK
$FW
6:ULW
3HWLWLRQ
DJDLQVW
RUGHUV SDVVHG 6 /DQG 5HYHQXH $FW ±
0DLQWDLQDELOLW\