Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 414 (ALL)

Arvind Upadhayay v. State of U. P.

2022-03-23

MANJU RANI CHAUHAN

body2022
JUDGMENT : 1. On 4th February, 2021, this Court passed following order: "On 5th December, 2016, a Coordinate Bench of this Court passed following order: "The present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of case no. 8008 of 2016, under Sections 31 Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), Police Station Civil Lines, District Allahabad pending in the court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 10, Allahabad. Further prayer has been made to stay further proceedings of the aforesaid case. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that during the pendency of the appeal filed against the order under Section 12 of the Act an application under Section 31 of the Act was moved by the aggrieved party. Concerned Magistrate exceeding the jurisdiction passed the orders dated 4.11.2016 and 8.11.2016. In the original order passed under Section 12 of the Act no relief/protection of right to residence was given. Since Section 31 of the Act is related to the execution of the order passed under Section 12 of the Act, no further order could be passed under Section 31 of the Act. It was further argued that Section 31 of the Act only deals with the penalty for breach of protection order by respondent. It was further argued that the impugned order passed by the court concerned in the proceedings under Section 31 of the Act are not appealable. Matter requires consideration. Learned AGA has accepted notice on behalf of the opposite party no.1. Issue notice to opposite party no. 2. Steps be taken by Registered Post A.D. within a week. All the opposite parties may file counter affidavit within four weeks. Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within two weeks thereafter. List this matter on 30.1.2017 before the appropriate Bench. Till the next date of listing, effect and operation of the orders dated 4.11.2016 and 8.11.2016 shall remain stayed." On 26th August, 2019, the same Coordinate Bench of this Court passed following order: "Present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to set-aside the order dated 4.11.2016 passed by the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.10, Allahabad in the proceedings under section 31 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.10, Allahabad in the proceedings under section 31 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. Perusal of the record reveals that no such relief was granted in the order dated 22.8.2016 passed in Case no.1362 of 2013 (Smt. Priyanka Vs. Arvind Kumar Upadhyay) in the proceedings under section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act as allowed on 4.11.2016 in the proceeding under section 31 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. Keeping in view the above facts, I find it necessary to call for a report from the court concerned/Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.10, Allahabad whether the order dated 4.11.2016 could be passed in the petition under section 31 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act beyond the relief granted vide order dated 22.8.2016. Thus, office is directed to send copy of this order to the court concerned within three days from today through Fax for submission of report. List this matter on 18.9.2019. In the meantime, rejoinder affidavit may be filed by the learned counsel for the applicant. Interim order, if any, is extended till the next date of listing." 2. On 27th November, 2019, an another Coordinate Bench of this Court passed following order: "Learned counsel for the applicant is present. He has mentioned that in compliance of Court's order, dated 6.11.2019, Arvind Upadhayay is not in a position to attend this Court because he is missing and a missing report has been lodged at Police Station, concerned, wherein, a report of Police, dated 16.5.2018, in form of certified copy, has been filed to the court, concerned. The same has been produced before this Court, too, though it is not supported by any affidavit. As the same is certified copy of Civil court, hence, perusal of it, reveals above situation. But, this report is of 16.5.2018, whereas, the order is of 6.11.2019. What was the situation, in between, has not been brought on record. This Court has directed Arvind Upadhayay for being present before this Court, but, he failed to appear in person before this Court. Hence, let Bailable Warrant be issued against Arvind Upadhayay, through, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi, for ensuring presence of Arvind Upadhayay before this Court on the next date fixed. This Court has directed Arvind Upadhayay for being present before this Court, but, he failed to appear in person before this Court. Hence, let Bailable Warrant be issued against Arvind Upadhayay, through, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi, for ensuring presence of Arvind Upadhayay before this Court on the next date fixed. Smt. Priyanaka Upadhyay, Opposite party no.2, who is present in person, has vehemently argued that Arvind Upadhayay is not missing, rather, for avoiding implementation of order of this Court, this step has been taken by him. Order, passed by the Magistrate, under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, is not being complied with, whereas, stay order has been obtained and the same is being misused. In view of above contention, it would be appropriate that let the matter be placed on the next date, fixed, to consider as to why stay order, if any, may not be vacated. Inspite of repeated direction of this Court, calling for explanation from the concerned Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.10, Allahabad, compliance report, in the form of explanation, has not been received as yet. District & Sessions Judge, Allahabad, is being directed for ensuring submission of explanation, in the form of compliance report, by above Court, at the earliest, otherwise, presence of the Presiding Officer, concerned, in person may be directed to be procured, by this court. List this case, for hearing, on 8th January, 2020." On 8th January, 2020, the said Coordinate Bench of this Court passed following order: "Learned counsel for both sides are present. Report-cum-explanation by Judicial Magistrate, Allahabad, has been filed and taken on record. Perusal of report reveals that previous report was also submitted but it was not there on record, copy of same has been filed. Impugned order has been passed by the then Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-X, Neeraj Kumar Garg and present Magistrate, who has filed reply, was of no concern. Even, she was not in service on above date. Hence, District and Sessions Judge, Allahabad, was directed to ensure submission of explanation of Magistrate, who had passed order under Section 31 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. But the explanation by the Magistrate concerned has yet not been filed. Even, she was not in service on above date. Hence, District and Sessions Judge, Allahabad, was directed to ensure submission of explanation of Magistrate, who had passed order under Section 31 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. But the explanation by the Magistrate concerned has yet not been filed. District and Sessions Judge, Allahabad, is being directed to ensure submission of explanation of the then Magistrate, over query made by this Court, regarding passing of order, over an application moved under Section 31 of the Act, beyond the order given under Section 12 of the Act. Arvind Upadhyay was directed to be present before this Court and it has been mentioned by his counsel that he is missing. A missing report was got lodged. The other side Priyanka Upadhyay, in person, had vehemently opposed this fact and had argued that he is at his parental residence and avoiding process of law. If he is missing, then how he is in contact with his counsel, who is arguing in this case. This seems to be a forceful argument. Hence, learned counsel for the applicant to ensure presence of Arvind Upadhyay before this Court. Let N.B.W. be issued against Arvind Upadhyay, through, C.J.M., Varanasi, for ensuring his presence before this Court. List in week commencing 24.2.2020. Interim order, if any, shall continue till the next date." Today, on the matter being taken up, learned counsel for the applicant is present and he states that the applicant, namely, Arvind Upadhyay is missing and he has not been traced out. He, therefore, prays that the matter may be posted for some other date and till then, the interim protection granted earlier to the applicant be also extended. On the other-hand, opposite party no.2, namely, Smt. Priyanka Upadhyay, who is present in person states that the applicant is not missing and deliberately he is disobeying the orders of the Court and enjoying the benefits of the interim order granted earlier to him in collusion with the officials and officers of the Police Department. It is impossible to believe that if the applicant is missing, then how he is in contact with his counsel, who is arguing in this case. It is impossible to believe that if the applicant is missing, then how he is in contact with his counsel, who is arguing in this case. On perusal of the order of the Coordinate Bench of this Court dated 27th November, 2019 quoted herein above, this Court finds substance in the submission made by opposite party no.2 that the applicant is not missing and he has been avoiding the order of this Court and process of law deliberately and due to the same, the Coordinate Bench vide order dated 27th November, 2019, has directed the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi for issuing bailable warrant against the applicant so that he may be appeared before this Court but he has not appeared. On 8th January, 2020, the said Coordinate Bench has not only directed the Chief Judicial magistrate, Varanasi to issue non-bailable warrant against the applicant for ensuring his presence before this Court but also directed the learned counsel for the applicant to ensure the presence of the applicant before this Court. Despite bailable warrant and non-bailable warrant having been issued and more than one year and two months from the date of the order dated 27th November, 2019 and one year and one month from the date of order dated 8th January, 2020 having been elapsed, the applicant has not appeared before this Court. Learned counsel for the applicant has also not ensured the presence of the applicant before this Court. In view of the aforesaid, this Court has no other option but to discharge the interim order dated 5th December, 2016 granted to the applicant and to direct the Senior Superintendent of Police, Varanasi for ensuring the presence of the applicant before this Court on the next date. The interim order dated 5th December, 2016 is, accordingly, discharged. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Varanasi shall ensure that the applicant, namely, Arvind Upadhyaya, son of Shri Lakshmi Prasad Upadhyaya, resident of 7/5A, Benipur Pahadia, Police Station-Sarnath, District-Varanasi is brought before this Court on the next date. The status report about the issuance of bailable warrant and non-bailable warrant by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi is not on record. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi is directed to file the same before this Court on the next date. The status report about the issuance of bailable warrant and non-bailable warrant by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi is not on record. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi is directed to file the same before this Court on the next date. The explanation of the then Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 10, Allahabad, namely, Neeraj Kumar Garg (now Additional District and Sessions Judge, Khurja, Bulandshahr), dated 27th January, 2020, who has passed the order dated 4th November, 2016 under Section 31 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act and the order dated 22nd August, 2016 has been sent to this Court through the District Judge, Allahabad and the same is on record, which is marked as Flag-D of the order-sheet. Before expressing any opinion on the explanation given by the then Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, the reply of the learned counsel for the applicant is required. Office is directed to provide a copy of the explanation dated 27th January, 2020 to the learned counsel for the applicant within three days. On receipt of the same, the learned counsel for the applicant shall file reply to the same by means of a supplementary affidavit. Opposite party no.2 shall also file counter affidavit on or before the next date. Put up this case on 22nd February, 2020 in the additional cause list. The Registrar General is directed to sent a copy of this order to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Varanasi and the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi for necessary compliance at their end within 48 hours." When the applicant was not being traced out, this Court on 8th September, 2021 passed following order: "On the matter being taken up, Mr. J.K. Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. assisted by Mr. Gaurav Pratap Singh, brief holder for the State and Mrs. Priyanka Upadhyaya, opposite party no.2 (in person) are present. Mr. Rajiv Upadhyay, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Rahul Mishra, Advocate who has filed an intervention application on behalf of one Laxmi Prasad Upadhyay, who happens to be the father of the applicant is also present. However, neither Mrs. Alka Singh and nor Mr. Vipin Kumar Singh, Advocates who have filed the present application on behalf of the applicant and also appeared before the Court earlier, are not present in the Court today, even in the revised reading of the list. However, neither Mrs. Alka Singh and nor Mr. Vipin Kumar Singh, Advocates who have filed the present application on behalf of the applicant and also appeared before the Court earlier, are not present in the Court today, even in the revised reading of the list. At this stage, this case has turned into a strange case, in which, being wife i.e. opposite party no.2 filed a case against her husband i.e. the applicant herein under the provisions of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 before the court below and the court below passed order dated 4th November, 2016 directing the husband to provide a separate living room to wife and daughter as also to give Rs. 1000/-for their maintenance. On the application filed by wife i.e. opposite party no.2, the court below passed another order dated 8th November, 2016 that if the husband i.e. applicant does not comply the order dated 4th November, 2016, the Station House Officer, Sarnath shall ensure the compliance of the said order. Against both the orders, the present application has been filed by the husband i.e. applicant, who obtained an interim order dated 5th December, 2016 ex parte, whereby the orders dated 4th and 8th November, 2016 were stayed till the next date of listing. Thereafter the wife i.e. opposite party no.2 appeared in the present case to defend her case in the present application. When the Court asked the learned counsel for the applicant to ensure production of the applicant before the Court, it has been informed by the learned counsel for the applicant that he is missing since 9th April, 2017 and a first information report about his missing has also been lodged on 16th May, 2018 at Police Station-Sarnath, District-Varanasi. Learned counsel for the applicant has further informed the Court that now he has no instruction on behalf of the applicant, as he is not in his contact. Thereafter Court passed various orders directing the learned counsel for the applicant as well as District Police Varanasi to ensure the production of the applicant before the Court but the applicant has not been produced before this Court either by the learned counsel for the applicant or by the District Police, Varanasi. In compliance of the order of the Court dated 28th March, 2021, an affidavit sworn by Mr. In compliance of the order of the Court dated 28th March, 2021, an affidavit sworn by Mr. Vikrant Vir, Deputy Commissioner of Police, Varuna Zone, Varanasi has been filed today in the Court on behalf of the State, which is taken on record. In paragraph nos. 4 to 6, it has been stated as follows: "4. That in compliance of the order passed by this Hon'ble Court the earlier Incharge of Police D.I.G./Senior Superintendent of Police, Varanasi has constituted a team for the search of applicant namely Arvind Upadhyay vide order dated 26.02-2021. 5. That the team constituted vide order dated 26.2.201 has with great effort tried to search the whereabouts of the applicant on various dates and places, which has been entered in G.D. record and the same can be produced before this Hon'ble Court as and when the Court wishes to peruse, however, the entire gist with regard to the efforts made by the searching team is being placed before this Hon'ble Court by way of progress report dated 02.04.2021 through the answering respondent. A Photostat copy of the progress report dated 02.04.2021 is being annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-2 to this affidavit. 6.That the police team constituted earlier is still searching the applicant namely Arvind Upadhyay with serious efforts and the same will be produced as and when recovered without wasting any time in compliance of the orders of this Hon'ble Court." This Court is sorry to record that the affidavit filed on behalf of the District Police of Varanasi is too flimsy to be accepted by this Court. The story made out in the affidavit from the side of Police is highly improbable, which is nothing else but a scene of drama. A person, who is missing since 9th April, 2017 and whose missing report has been lodged on 16th May, 2018, is not traceable inspite of all the efforts of the police. The same appears to be fishy as stated by the wife of the applicant i.e. opposite party no.2 herein. In today's modern era, where the policemen have got all the facilities, yet the police is not able to find out a person, despite several orders of this Court. This creates a doubt in the mind of a common ordinary person. The same appears to be fishy as stated by the wife of the applicant i.e. opposite party no.2 herein. In today's modern era, where the policemen have got all the facilities, yet the police is not able to find out a person, despite several orders of this Court. This creates a doubt in the mind of a common ordinary person. Either the police can say that they have not got full powers or facilities or they are not able to find out the person, who is missing since 9th April, 2017 and this case should be given to some other agency. The opposite party no.2, wife of the applicant, who is present, states before this Court that she has disclosed to the Police regarding whereabouts of the applicant but the Police reaches the place after giving space to the applicant to flee from there. It has also been brought to the knowledge of the Court that several cases, wherein maintenance has been awarded by the orders of the court, are pending and even notices have not been served upon the parties due to which women are suffering, as in the present case, which is the best example of harassment faced by the women even after passage of nearly five years from the date of orders in her favour. An Intervention Application has been filed by Mr. Rahul Mishra, Advocate on behalf of one Laxmi Prasad Upadhyay, who happens to be the father of the applicant. In the affidavit filed in support of the intervention application, it has been stated that it is only because of the applicant's mental imbalance induced due to long standing acrimony, differences, disputes with opposite party no.2 that he went missing and could not be found till date despite Gumshudagi Report lodged in the year 2017 itself. It is further stated that neither he nor any of his relatives have any knowledge about the whereabouts of the applicant-Arvind Kumar Upadhyay and therefore, he and his wife who are ailing senior citizens may be rescued from the police authorities, who are harassing and victimising them on the pretext of complying with various orders of the Hon'ble Court. It is further stated that neither he nor any of his relatives have any knowledge about the whereabouts of the applicant-Arvind Kumar Upadhyay and therefore, he and his wife who are ailing senior citizens may be rescued from the police authorities, who are harassing and victimising them on the pretext of complying with various orders of the Hon'ble Court. In the intervention application, it has also been stated that during the pendency of the present application, the applicant-Arvind Kumar Upadhyay suffered with mental imbalance and was subjected to treatment at Mental Hospital, Varanasi and while he was receiving treatment, he left the house and went missing since 9th April, 2017, true copies of medical treatment from Mental Hospital, Varanasi has been enclosed as Annexure-1 to the affidavit accompanying the Intervention Application. To the averments made in the affidavit accompanying the Intervention Application, opposite party no.2 submits before this Court that the applicant is not missing anywhere, he has deliberately left his house and is hidden somewhere. The father and other family members of the applicant have also helped him only in order to disobey the orders of the court below dated 4th November, 2016 and dated 8th November, 2016. Opposite party no.2 further submits that after the orders of the court below dated 4th and 8th November, 2016, father of the applicant (Intervenor before this Court) has deliberately sold his properties only for harassing opposite party no.2 and her female child as well as to disobey the orders of the court below and this Court. Opposite party no.2 further submits that the averment made in the intervention application that the applicant was suffering from some mental imbalance for which his treatment was going on in Mental Hospital Varanasi, is also incorrect, because the medical prescriptions, which have been enclosed along with the affidavit accompanying the intervention application, do not establish as to the exact mental ailment of the applicant. Lastly, opposite party no.2 submits that the conduct of the father of the applicant (Intervenor) and other family members of the applicant is doubtful. Prima facie, the submissions made by opposite party no.2 appears to be correct. Opposite party no.2 may file response, if any, to the aforesaid intervention application on or before the next date. In this case, there is a question of maintenance of a married woman and her small daughter in these hard days. Prima facie, the submissions made by opposite party no.2 appears to be correct. Opposite party no.2 may file response, if any, to the aforesaid intervention application on or before the next date. In this case, there is a question of maintenance of a married woman and her small daughter in these hard days. Now when the husband of a woman (applicant and opposite party no.2 herein) is not available, then her mother-in-law and father-in-law, who are like her father and mother, also become their responsibility. After marriage, a woman's husband and in-laws are everything. In this case, there is a question of peaceful life, safety and education of a girl child, who is none other but grand-daughter of the parents of the applicant. In-laws of a woman or grand parents of a girl child cannot leave her daughter-in-law or grand daughter alone if the husband of said woman or father of the said girl child, is missing. In view of the present facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is left with no option but to direct the Commissioner of Police, Varanasi to appear before this Court for explaining the fair conduct of the Police of District Varanasi. However, seeing the intricacies, this Court constrains itself in passing such orders without affording one opportunity to such a Senior Officer of the Police Department at Varanasi. This Court, therefore, directs the Commissioner of Police, Varanasi to file his personal affidavit categorically explaining as to why the applicant is not traceable by the Police, despite the fact that a first information report about the missing of the applicant has been lodged on 16th May, 2018 at Sarnath Police Station, Varanasi and various orders have been passed by this Court for production of the applicant before the Court. In the affidavit it shall also be disclosed about the prima facie observations made by this Court herein above. In the affidavit, it shall also be indicated as to how many days, the applicant shall be traceable by the Police. The affidavit shall be filed on or before the next date i.e. 29th September, 2021. In the affidavit it shall also be disclosed about the prima facie observations made by this Court herein above. In the affidavit, it shall also be indicated as to how many days, the applicant shall be traceable by the Police. The affidavit shall be filed on or before the next date i.e. 29th September, 2021. Seeing this pitiable predicament of a woman, who has been grappling from pillar to post and getting hoodwinked by multifarious impediments, which are purportedly for the objective of harbouring the applicant from the shrewdness of this Court, excogitated by the family of the husband, is an archetype illustration of the loopholes in way of our criminal justice system. To counteract and proscribe kindred occurrences in future and to safeguard the right to maintenance of wives, this Court directs the Commissioner of Police, Varanasi also to find out properties/whereabouts of the applicant as well as in-laws of opposite party no.2 promptly and after searching the same, in any one of the property/whereabout, he shall ensure that opposite party no.2 and her daughter are permitted to stay, so that the orders of the court below dated 4th and 8th November, 2016 may be complied with, as interim order granted earlier by this Court staying the operation of the same has not been extended and same stood discharged earlier. He shall also take assistance of opposite party no.2 i.e. wife of the applicant in tracing him as well as finding out the properties of the applicant and his father. On the next date, the District Judge, Varanasi as well as the Commissioner of Police Varanasi, shall inform the Court of the similar cases, where the maintenance has been awarded by the courts but the same has not been executed, as summons have not been served till date. On earlier occasions, the Court has been informed that the applicant is not missing and he is in contact with his counsels, who are not present in the Court today. On the last occasion also i.e. 1st March, 2021, learned counsels for the applicant were not present. The appearance of Mrs. Alka Singh and Mr. Vipin Kumar Singh, Advocates, who have filed their vakalatnama on behalf of the applicant in the present application and also appeared earlier, before the Court on his behalf, are necessarily required in the present strange case. The appearance of Mrs. Alka Singh and Mr. Vipin Kumar Singh, Advocates, who have filed their vakalatnama on behalf of the applicant in the present application and also appeared earlier, before the Court on his behalf, are necessarily required in the present strange case. The Secretary, Allahabad High Court Bar Association, Allahabad shall ensure that Mrs. Alka Singh (A/A-0060/16) and nor Mr. Vipin Kumar Singh, Advocates, (En. No.-04687105, AOR No.-A/V.-0438/12, Mobile No. 9415630302), resident of 148A, N.B. H.C., Allahabad, appear in the Court on the next date i.e. 29th September, 2021. Put up this case on 29th September, 2021 at 02:00 p.m. A copy of this order shall be provided to the learned A.G.A., who shall communicate the same to the District Judge, Varanasi, Commissioner of Police, Varanasi as well as to the Secretary, Allahabad High Court Bar, Association for necessary compliance by Wednesday i.e. 15th September, 2021. The party shall file computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of the High Court, Allahabad, self attested by the party concerned along with a self attested identity proof of the said person(s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number(s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked. The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court, Allahabad and shall made a declaration of such verification in writing." 3. Thereafter on 6th October, 2021, 27th October, 2021, 17th November, 2021 and 16th December, 2021, this Court passed orders for tracing out the applicant, namely, Arvind Upadhya. Ultimately, when the matter was taken up on 10th March, 2022, the Court has been informed by Mr. J.K. Upadhaya, learned A.G.A. for the State that the applicant has been recovered by the Police in compliance of the orders of this Court passed earlier. On the said date, for amicably settling the dispute between the applicant and opposite party no.2, this Court passed following order: "Mr. J.K. Upadhyay, learned A.G.A for the State submits that in compliance of the order of the Court dated 16th December, 2021, he has received instructions and the same has been placed before this Court, which is taken on record. J.K. Upadhyay, learned A.G.A for the State submits that in compliance of the order of the Court dated 16th December, 2021, he has received instructions and the same has been placed before this Court, which is taken on record. Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 16th December, 2021, the applicant, namely, Arvind Upadhyaya, has been found by the team of the Police so constituted by the Commissioner of Police, Varanasi in compliance of the earlier orders of this Court. Since the applicant and his parents have misled the government officials and police in order to avoid the orders of this Court as well as court below, a first information report has been lodged by Sub-Inspector, Police Station-Sarnath, District Varanasi on 4th January, 2022,against the applicant and his father and mother, namely, Laxmi Shanker Upadhyay and Radhika Devi, which has been registered as Crime No. 0006 of 2022 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 182, 188 and 120-B I.P.C., Police Station-Sarnath, District Varanasi pursuant to which the applicant has been taken into custody and sent to jail. At present, the applicant is in District Jail, Varanasi. From the perusal of the entire material available on records of the present application, it is apparently clear that the applicant along with his parents is tried to disobey the orders of this Court and the court below and have also misled the authorities concerned and this Court, hence the appearance of the applicant is required for appropriate adjudication of the matter. Accordingly, the Commissioner of Police, Varanasi and the Superintendent of District Jail, Varanasi are directed to ensure the appearance of the applicant before this Court on 23rd March, 2022 in the judicial custody. On the basis of instructions so received by Mr. J.K. Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. for the State and Mr. Gaurav Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State, it is also clear that the parents of the applicant, namely, Laxmi Shanker Upadhyay and Radhika Devi had also helped the applicant in running away from the Police authorities and in disobeying the orders of this Court and the court below. As such, the presence of the parents of the applicant is also required. Mr. J.K. Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. for the State and Mr. As such, the presence of the parents of the applicant is also required. Mr. J.K. Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. for the State and Mr. Gaurav Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State are directed to make all endeavour to ensure that the parents of the applicant, namely, Laxmi Shanker Upadhyay and Radhika Devi, are appeared before this Court on the next date for which they shall take help of the concerned Police authorities. For proper adjudication of the present matter, Mrs. Anjali Upadhyay, opposite party no.2, who is present in person, is also directed that on the next date, she shall appear before this Court along with her parents. List this case on 23rd March, 2022 at 02:00 p.m. A copy of this order be provided to Mr. J.K. Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. for the State and Mr. Gaurav Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State by tomorrow i.e. 11th March, 2022, who shall communicate the same to Commissioner of Police, Varanasi and the Superintendent of District Jail, Varanasi for necessary compliance of this order henceforth. The Registrar General is also directed to communicate this order to the Commissioner of Police, Varanasi and the Superintendent of District Jail, Varanasi for necessary compliance." 4. While exercising its extra ordinary power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeing the fact that woman along with her daughter i.e. opposite party no.2 filed a case against her husband i.e. the applicant herein under the provisions of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 before the court below and the court below passed order dated 4th November, 2016 directing the husband to provide a separate living room to wife and daughter as also to give Rs. 1000/-for their maintenance. On the application filed by wife i.e. opposite party no.2, the court below passed another order dated 8th November, 2016 that if the husband i.e. applicant does not comply the order dated 4th November, 2016, the Station House Officer, Sarnath shall ensure the compliance of the said order. Against both the orders, the present application has been filed by the husband i.e. applicant, who obtained an interim order dated 5th December, 2016 ex parte, whereby the orders dated 4th and 8th November, 2016 were stayed till the next date of listing. Thereafter the wife i.e. opposite party no.2 appeared in person in the present case to defend her case in the present application. Thereafter the wife i.e. opposite party no.2 appeared in person in the present case to defend her case in the present application. When the Court asked the learned counsel for the applicant to ensure production of the applicant before the Court, it has been informed by the learned counsel for the applicant that he is missing since 9th April, 2017 and a first information report about his missing has also been lodged on 16th May, 2018 at Police Station-Sarnath, District-Varanasi. Learned counsel for the applicant has further informed the Court that now he has no instruction on behalf of the applicant, as he is not in his contact. Thereafter, this Court had come to a conclusion that the applicant is escaping from his wife and daughter only in order to avoid the orders of the Court, whereby he has been directed to pay maintenance to his wife and daughter. Therefore, this Court only in order to ensure that maintenance is provided to a woman and her daughter in accordance with law, for the same various orders have been passed including the order discharging the interim order passed in the present application dated 5th December, 2016. In between, on the discharge application made by both the learned counsel appearing for the applicant that neither they had any instruction on behalf of the applicant nor they were in contact with him, this Court discharged the appearance of both the counsel in the present application and only for ensuring the maintenance for being provided to opposite party no.2, this Court did not dismiss the present application and proceeded further. Therefore, this Court wanted to resolve the matters relating to Family and Marital Disputes arrived between the parties, who are none other than the husband and wife, who have a daughter. 5. This Court very well knew that if any dispute arrives between the husband and wife, the challenge is mostly faced by females because they are assumed to handle the age-old responsibility of taking care of the family and children, it is more of a challenge for a female because when she is earning it becomes even more difficult because she is entrusted with two responsibilities that is of taking care of the house and the children and also to take care of the work and the career they have persuade. One of the major reasons in India for the marital conflict or even dispute to arise is when a woman is married to a man and a man is married to a woman then it is not just enough that they have married just each other but they actually get married to each other's family too. Especially in India, there is a lot of involvement of each other's family into the marital life which can sometimes create a problem. Another reason that can create a problem in the marital relations is dealing with each other's habits and addictions. For example, addiction to alcohol, smoking, television and so on, or the habit of simply coming late back home. These habits might not just give a way to a conflict but can cause disputes for the same. The major objective of this paper is to highlight what problem a woman faces or how domestic violence is a stigma to the society but it is to see how our legal system handles the above-mentioned problems with the tool called Mediation. 6. Considering the aforesaid facts, when the applicant has been recovered by the respondent-Police in compliance of the orders of this Court passed from time to time, this Court vide order dated 10th March, 2022 directed the authorities concerned to ensure the presence of applicant and his parents before this Court on the next date. The Court has also required the opposite party no.2 to remain present on the next date. 7. In compliance of the order of the Court dated 10th March, 2022, the applicant, namely, Arvind Upadhya has been produced before this Court today in the judicial custody from District Jail, Varanasi by Mr. Shabir, Sub-Inspector, Mr. Anvaar Ahmad, Head Constable and Mr. Ram Kumar, Constable of Police Lines, Commissionerate, Varanasi. Signatures of the applicant has also been identified by the said Police Personnels. 8. Pursuant to the order dated 10th March, 2022, the father and mother of the applicant, namely, Laxmi Shanker Upadhyay and Radhika Devi have also been produced by Mr. Sudhakar, Sub-Inspector, Police Station-Sarnath, District-Varanasi and their signatures have also been identified by Mr. Sudhakar. 9. Mrs. Anjali Upadhyay, opposite party no.2 is also present in the Court today. Despite the fact that this Court on 10th March, 2022 has orally directed Mrs. Sudhakar, Sub-Inspector, Police Station-Sarnath, District-Varanasi and their signatures have also been identified by Mr. Sudhakar. 9. Mrs. Anjali Upadhyay, opposite party no.2 is also present in the Court today. Despite the fact that this Court on 10th March, 2022 has orally directed Mrs. Upadhyay to appear on the next date along with her father or brother so that a concrete mediation may be done between the parties, she has not brought her father or brother to this Court. 10. Since the dispute between the parties is matrimonial in nature, this matter has been taken up in the Chambers of the Court. 11. To arrive at a amicable settlement between the parties, this Court first called the applicant and his parents to have their say in the matter and this Court asked them as to why they are not keeping the opposite party no.2 Anjali Upadhyay and her daughter and they are not giving money for the house and alimony for his wife and child for their livlihood as maintenance. This Court also asked the applicant as to why he was running away from his wife i.e. opposite party no.2 on which they told that they want to keep Anjali and her daughter but the opposite party no.2 did not live with her in-laws. Opposite party no.2 is not a normal woman. She used to harass, abuse and beat the applicant and his parents. She also calls them stupid, idiots and beggars. She creates one or the other kind of problems to make their lives difficult. The applicant and his parents said that instead of living with her, they would prefer to die. The applicant, with tears in his eyes and and with folded hands, also prayed that he be sent to jail again as he does not come out of jail, because it is better to stay in jail than to live with opposite party no.2. 12. When this Court called opposite party no.2 to talk to her husband and in-laws, so that the matter may be settled amicably, she misbehaved and threatened them to be prepare to go jail, as she will lodge various cases and will make their lives difficult. As this happened in the presence of the Court and the Court and Staff tried to stop her but she stared misbehaving with all present. As this happened in the presence of the Court and the Court and Staff tried to stop her but she stared misbehaving with all present. When this Court warned her, she caught hold of Court's hand and even after repeated warning of the Court, she was not leaving the hands of the Court. This Court tried to convince her again and again so that the differences between the opposite party no.2 and the applicants and her in-laws may come to an end and they may live a happy life but for the reasons best known to opposite party no.2 she was not convinced and she interfered in the administration of justice. 13. Somehow the Court called the Police and got opposite party no.2 Anjali out of the Chambers of the Court. 14. Our intention was only that by calling everyone together, a settlement may be arrived at between the husband and wife who have a child and everyone may live a happy life. Because fighting gives nothing and everyone's life becomes hell. 15. Mr. J.K. Upadhayay, learned A.G.A. has also submitted before the Court that opposite party no.2 harasses and misbehaves with the Police Officers and threatens that if they do not do of her choice, they would face evil civil consequences as she will not leave them Scott free. 16. Looking at all this, it seems to the Court that the opposite party no.2 does not want to live a happy life with her husband and in-laws. She is a confused/troubled woman herself and wants to trouble her husband and in-laws too. 17. Seeing the facts that even after making all efforts, the Court has failed to bring the husband and wife together along with their daughter, so that they may live happy life, as the disputes between the parties have not been settled amicably, interim order granted earlier dated 5th December, 2016 and appearance of both the counsel appearing for the applicant have already been discharged by this Court, referred to above, as well as the fact that the applicant, who has been produced before this Court in the judicial custody, has prayed that this application be dismissed as not pressed, this Court has no other option but to dismiss the same. It is ordered accordingly. 18. It is ordered accordingly. 18. However, it is made clear that both the parties i.e. the applicant and opposite party no.2 shall avail their remedies, which may be permissible under law. 19. It is a different matter that the dispute between husband and wife i.e. applicant and opposite party no.2 could not be resolved in the present case as the no dispute can be brought to its logical end without the consent of the parties, but this Court appreciates Mr. J.K. Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. as well as Police Officers of Varanasi, who have done a commendable job in bringing this case to this point and finding the applicant, who has been missing for more than two years. 20. At the end, this Court is of the opinion that several cases, wherein maintenance has been awarded by the orders of the court, are pending and even notices have not been served upon the parties due to which women are suffering, as in the present case, which is the best example of harassment faced by the women even after passage of nearly five years from the date of orders in her favour-seeing this pitiable predicament of a woman, who has been grappling from pillar to post and getting hoodwinked by multifarious impediments, which are purportedly for the objective of harbouring the applicant from the shrewdness of this Court, excogitated by the family of the husband, is an archetype illustration of the loopholes in way of our criminal justice system. To counteract and proscribe kindred occurrences in future and to safeguard the right to maintenance of wives, this Court directs the Director General of Police, State of U.P. at Lucknow to ensure that the summons are served upon the person concerned, which have been issued, in execution of the maintenance allowance granted by the courts in favour of a married women. 21. This application stands dismissed, accordingly. 22. Since this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has already been dismissed, no further orders are required to be passed in the Intervention Application filed by Mr. Rahul Mishra, Advocate on behalf of one Laxmi Prasad Upadhyay, who happens to be the father of the applicant and is present in the Court. 23. Mr. J.K. Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. for the State and Mr. Rahul Mishra, Advocate appearing for Laxmi Prasad Uapdhyay, who filed the intervention application are present in the Chambers of the Court 24. Mr. Rahul Mishra, Advocate on behalf of one Laxmi Prasad Upadhyay, who happens to be the father of the applicant and is present in the Court. 23. Mr. J.K. Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. for the State and Mr. Rahul Mishra, Advocate appearing for Laxmi Prasad Uapdhyay, who filed the intervention application are present in the Chambers of the Court 24. Mr. Shabir, Sub-Inspector, Mr. Anvar Ahmad, Head Constable and Mr. Ram Kumar, Constable of Police Lines, Commissionerate, Varanasi are directed to take the applicant Arvind Upadhyay to Central Jain, Varanasi in the judicial custody today itself. 25. A certified copy of this order shall be provided to Mr. J.K. Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. for the State to communicate the same to the Director General of Police, State of U.P. at Lucknow and the Commissioner, Varanasi Division, Varanasi.