Dinesh Pathak, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The present applicant has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. assailing the order dated 15.04.2023 passed by the learned Principal Judge Family Court, Mathura granting interim maintenance in favour of contesting respondents in Maintenance Case No. 226 of 2022, under Section 125 Cr.P.C. (Smt. Sudha Agrawal vs. Yatin Kumar).

3. Facts culled out from the averment made in the instant application are that Smt. Sudha Agrawal (O.P. No. 2) along with her two minor children has moved an application dated 05.04.2022 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for maintenance against the present applicant (husband). During pendency of the aforesaid proceeding, opposite party no. 2 has moved an application for interim maintenance. Learned trial court, vide order impugned dated 15.04.2023, has allowed the interim maintenance application granting maintenance to the wife to the tune of Rs. 6,000/- per month and to the two children Rs. 2,000/- per month each, total Rs. 6,000+Rs. 2,000+Rs. 2,000= Rs. 10,000/- per mensem, which is under challenge before this Court. The applicant has assailed the aforesaid order being passed sans opportunity of hearing accorded to him. The applicant is admitting his marital relationship with opposite party no. 2 being husband and wife and is also admitting that both the children borne out of wedlock with opposite party no. 2. It is own case of the present applicant that he is a teacher of Madhyamik Shiksha Vibhag in the State of Rajasthan and as per his pay scale he was drawing Rs. 36,950/- in the year 2015, however, till now his salary must have been increased.

4. In this conspectus, as above, I do not find any justifiable ground to interfere in the order impugned dated 15.04.2023 granting interim maintenance to opposite party no. 2 and her minor children. Salary of the applicant is sufficient to pay amount of Rs. 10,000/- per mensem as an interim maintenance to his wife and children and same cannot be said to be exorbitant, which is commensurate to the salary drawn by him. So far as opportunity of hearing is concerned, on pointed query to the learned counsel for the applicant being raised, he admitted the marital relationship of the applicant and opposite party no. 2 and also the salary draw by the present applicant being a teacher. Having considered the admitted position of the marital relationship of the applicant and opposite party no. 2 and the salary draw by him, there is no justification to alter or quash the order dated 15.04.2023 for want of opportunity of hearing. It is admitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the present applicant is already appeared before the courts below.

5. As such, this Court do not find any justifiable ground to interfere in the order impugned dated 15.04.2023 in exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Neither there is any abuse of process of court nor any compelling circumstance to secure the ends of justice. There is nothing on record to demonstrate as to how present applicant is prejudiced, or if is there any likelihood of causing miscarriage of justice to him, owing to the order impugned.

6. Resultantly, the present application, being devoid on merits and misconceived, is dismissed with no order as to costs.

7. Before parting the matter, learned counsel for the applicant has urged to direct the court below to decide the matrimonial case under Section 125 Cr.P.C. expeditiously.

8. Learned A.G.A. states that he has no objection in case the aforesaid matter is directed to be decided within a stipulated period as fixed by this Court.

9. As such, learned Principal Judge Family Court, Mathura, before whom the case is pending consideration, is hereby directed to consider and decide the same expeditiously, preferably, within a period of five months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.

10. It is expected that it should be decided by reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law, after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned without granting unnecessary adjournments.