The Allahabad High Court, presided over by Justice Praveen Kumar Giri, has issued a notice to an ex-wife and demanded an explanation from the Additional Principal Judge of the Family Court, Jhansi, for directing a husband to pay monthly maintenance to his ex-wife despite being officially informed of her second marriage. The High Court was hearing a criminal revision petition filed by the husband, who challenged the family court’s order to the extent of the Rs. 10,000 monthly maintenance granted to his ex-wife under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.).
Background of the Case
The matrimonial dispute between the husband and his ex-wife led to a divorce judgment and decree on July 30, 2025, passed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Jhansi, which dissolved their marriage. Aggrieved by this dissolution, the husband filed First Appeal No. 736 of 2025 before the High Court.
In those appellate proceedings, the wife filed a short counter affidavit, deposing in paragraph 4:
“That it is further submitted that after passing of impugned order dated 30.07.2025 the respondent wife has remarriage on 03.09.2025 after 30 days of passing of impugned order in this connection copy of the affidavit of wife/respondent dated 18.09.2025 is being file herewith and marked as Annexure- C.A.-1 to this affidavit.”
She also annexed a notary affidavit dated September 18, 2025, declaring that she had performed a second marriage on September 3, 2025, in accordance with the wishes of her elderly, ailing parents and keeping her minor son’s interests in mind. During a subsequent hearing on September 19, 2025, the wife’s counsel confirmed this remarriage, which was recorded in the High Court’s order.
Arguments of the Parties
In the parallel maintenance proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. before the Family Court, Jhansi, the husband filed an objection on October 30, 2025, pointing out that the wife had remarried on September 3, 2025.
Representing the husband, the learned counsel argued that under the explanation to Section 125(1) Cr.P.C., a divorced wife is only entitled to maintenance if she has not remarried. Since the wife had entered a second marriage, she was no longer legally entitled to receive maintenance from her former husband due to this change in circumstances. The counsel submitted that the trial court was fully apprised of this development through the written objection but chose to ignore it.
The husband’s counsel further stated that while the husband vehemently opposes the Rs. 10,000 monthly maintenance ordered for the ex-wife, he has no objection to paying the Rs. 5,000 monthly maintenance ordered for his minor son. Sri Pankaj Kumar, the learned Additional Government Advocate (A.G.A.), represented the State.
The Court’s Analysis
The High Court observed that the fact of the wife’s remarriage was explicitly disclosed to the trial court through the husband’s written objection on October 30, 2025. Despite this, the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Jhansi, passed an order on March 10, 2026, directing the husband to pay Rs. 10,000 per month to the ex-wife and Rs. 5,000 per month to the minor son. The High Court found it necessary to question why the trial court ignored this crucial factual disclosure while directing the husband to continue paying maintenance to the remarried wife.
The Court’s Decision
Taking serious note of the trial court’s order, Justice Praveen Kumar Giri directed the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Jhansi, to submit an explanation. The court ordered:
“Sri Harish Chandra, Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Jhansi, J.O. No.UP 1757 is directed to submit his explanation as to why despite disclosing the fact of second marriage of the applicant (wife)/O.P. No.2 herein in the objection dated 30.10.2025 even then he has passed the order directing the revisionist to pay Rs.10,000/- to the wife.”
The High Court issued a notice to the ex-wife to file her counter affidavit within two weeks. The learned A.G.A. was directed to communicate this order to her through the concerned police station.
Additionally, the Registrar (Compliance) was directed to communicate the order to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhansi, for immediate service on the ex-wife, requiring her appearance before the High Court either personally or through counsel on the next scheduled date of July 21, 2026. The Family Court judge must also submit his explanation on or before the next hearing date.
Case Details:
Case Title: Rajesh Chaturvedi v. State of U.P. and Another
Case No.: Criminal Revision No. 3561 of 2026
Bench: Justice Praveen Kumar Giri
Date: July 07, 2026
