Haroon Rashid Siddiqui vs Smt. Nazneen Siddiqui

Court
Madhya Pradesh High Court

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:87391
1 MCRC-44156-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR

BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HIMANSHU JOSHI
th
ON THE 26 OF OCTOBER, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 44156 of 2026
CNR No.: MPHC010662832026
HAROON RASHID SIDDIQUI
Versus
SMT. NAZNEEN SIDDIQUI
Appearance:
Shri Ankur Shrivastava - Advocate for the petitioner.
None for the respondent.
ORDER
The present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 has been preferred by the petitioner seeking a direction to
the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chhatarpur, to decide the
application filed by him under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C., registered as
MJCR No.1426/2025, within a time-bound period.
2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the marriage between the
petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on 29.11.2024 at Chhatarpur in
accordance with Muslim rites and rituals. According to the petitioner, the
respondent left the matrimonial home on 28.12.2024 and thereafter initiated
proceedings against him and his family members. The respondent filed an
application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic
Violence Act, 2005, registered as MJCR No. 345/2025, before the learned
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRACHI PANDEY
Signing time: 03-11-2026
15:11:41

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:87391
2 MCRC-44156-2026
JMFC, Chhatarpur. The petitioner alleges that the respondent made false

statements and suppressed material facts in the affidavit of assets and
liabilities filed in the said proceedings, contrary to the directions issued by
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajnesh Vs. Neha, 2021 (2) SCC 324.
Consequently, the petitioner filed an application under Section 340 of the
Cr.P.C. on 09.09.2025, seeking action against the respondent. The said
application was registered on 11.09.2025, and notice was issued to the
respondent, as reflected in Annexures P/1 and P/2.
3. It is further averred that the respondent subsequently instituted
proceedings under Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,
2023, for maintenance of Rs.20,000/- per month, registered as MJCR
No.278/2025, before the Family Court, Chhatarpur. The petitioner alleges
that the respondent reiterated false statements in the said proceedings. He
filed applications seeking consideration of the alleged discrepancies in the
affidavits, production of relevant documents and a stay of the maintenance
proceedings pending adjudication of his application under Section 340 of the
Cr.P.C. The petitioner has referred to the applications dated 06.07.2026 and
21.07.2026, filed in the pending proceedings, as Annexures P/5 and P/6.
4. The petitioner further submits that the learned Family Court, by
order dated 06.04.2026, rejected his application seeking stay of the
maintenance proceedings. Thereafter, by order dated 23.07.2026 (Annexure
P/7), the learned Family Court dismissed his application and imposed costs
of Rs.25,000/-, directing him to deposit the amount with the Legal Aid
Authority, Chhatarpur, before participating in the proceedings. The petitioner
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRACHI PANDEY
Signing time: 03-11-2026
15:11:41

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:87391
3 MCRC-44156-2026
claims that, owing to his financial inability to deposit the costs, he could not

participate in the proceedings, whereupon he was proceeded against ex-parte
on 07.08.2026. The respondent's evidence was recorded on 10.08.2026, and
the maintenance matter was fixed for final arguments. The petitioner
contends that deciding the maintenance proceedings before adjudication of
his application under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C. would cause serious
prejudice to him. He, therefore, seeks a direction for expeditious disposal of
the pending application.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the application under
Section 340 of the Cr.P.C. has remained pending since September 2025,
despite issuance of notice to the respondent. It is contended that the
petitioner has specifically identified contradictions and alleged false
statements in the affidavits filed by the respondent in the domestic violence
and maintenance proceedings. According to the petitioner, the pendency of
the application assumes significance because the maintenance proceedings
have reached the stage of final arguments after he was proceeded against ex-
parte.
6. Learned counsel further submits that the learned JMFC ought to
decide the application expeditiously and that the petitioner should not be
prejudiced by the continuation of the maintenance proceedings without
adjudication of the alleged perjury.
7. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.
8. The limited relief sought in the present petition is a direction for
time-bound disposal of the application under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRACHI PANDEY
Signing time: 03-11-2026
15:11:41

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:87391
4 MCRC-44156-2026
From the material placed on record, it appears that the petitioner's application

under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C. was registered on 11.09.2025 and notice
was issued to the respondent. The grievance regarding delay in consideration
of the pending application, therefore, deserves appropriate consideration.
However, the allegations of false statements and suppression of material
facts are yet to be examined by the competent court in accordance with law.
Mere filing of an application under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C. does not
establish that the respondent has committed perjury, nor does it confer upon
the petitioner an automatic right to have the maintenance proceedings stayed
until such application is decided.
9. It is also pertinent to observe that proceedings under Section 340 of
the Cr.P.C. involve consideration of whether an inquiry is expedient in the
interests of justice in respect of an offence referred to in Section 195(1)(b) of
the Cr.P.C. The Court concerned is required to apply its judicial mind to the
nature of the alleged falsehood, the material available on record and the
necessity of initiating a complaint in the interests of justice. The mere
existence of contradictory statements or a disputed affidavit does not, by
itself, necessitate prosecution. The learned Magistrate must independently
consider the application and pass an appropriate order in accordance with
law.
10. In the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly having
regard to the pendency of the application since September 2025, this Court
considers it appropriate to direct the learned JMFC, Chhatarpur, to take up
the application under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C., registered as MJCR
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRACHI PANDEY
Signing time: 03-11-2026
15:11:41

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:87391
5 MCRC-44156-2026
No.1426/2025, and endeavour to decide the same expeditiously, preferably

within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this
order, subject to cooperation of the parties and the court's workload. The
learned Magistrate shall consider the application on its own merits,
uninfluenced by any observations made herein. With the aforesaid direction,
the petition stands disposed of.
(HIMANSHU JOSHI)
JUDGE
Prachi
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRACHI PANDEY
Signing time: 03-11-2026
15:11:41