Allahabad High Court
Parshuram Singh vs State Of U.P. & Another on 23 November, 2017
Bench: Prabhat Chandra Tripathi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?A.F.R.
Court No. - 17
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 20883 of 2007
Petitioner :- Parshuram Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Another
Counsel for Petitioner :- O.P. Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate,Sudhir Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Prabhat Chandra Tripathi,J.
Case called out. None responds on behalf of the petitioner. Sri Sudhir Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the respondent no.1 State of U.P. are present.
There is none on behalf of the petitioner to press this writ petition.
Heard learned counsel for the respondent no.2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The instant writ petition has been preferred on behalf of the petitioner against the judgement and order dated 28.9.2007 passed by the learned court of Sessions Judge, Ballia in criminal revision no.232 of 2007 (Parashuram Singh Vs. Sushila Devi), under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Chitbaragaon, District Ballia whereby the learned court of Sessions Judge, Ballia has dismissed the revision preferred against exparte judgement and order dated 25.6.2007 passed by the learned court of the Civil Judge (Junior Division) East/Judicial Magistrate, Ballia in case no.122 of 2007 (Smt. Sushila Singh Vs. Parashuram Singh), whereby the Civil Judge (Junior Division) East/Judicial Magistrate, Ballia has allowed the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. of the opposite party no. 2 as exparte and ordered the petitioner to pay Rs.1,500/- to the opposite party no.2 from the date of the judgement.
The factual matrix of the case is enumerated as below:-
"Opposite party no.2 Sushila Singh was married to petitioner Parashuram Singh 25 years ago at her paternal home Ramjue Chit, Police Station Chibaragaon, District Ballia. Due to this marital wedlock between both the parties they were blessed with one son and one daughter. The petitioner Parashuram Singh illegitimately remarried with one girl Sona Devi resident of Bairawa (Bhimpura). Petitioner has beaten and harassed the opposite party no.2. Petitioner had denied the maintenance to her. Petitioner is working as teacher in Primary School, Sultanipur, Block Rasara and earns Rs.10,000/- per month as salary, he owned 25 bighas of agricultural land. Opposite party no.2 has prayed to allow her maintenance to the tune of Rs.5000/- per month. Petitioner has denied his marriage with the opposite party no.2. Instead he has admitted his marriage with Sona Devi. Petitioner has admitted to keep the opposite party no.2 with him. Petitioner had admitted that he was a Primary School Teacher and earns salary of Rs.6,500/- per month. He owned 11 bighas of agricultural land out of which only 7 bighas of land could be cultivated. Opposite party no.2 in oral evidence produced herself as A.P.W. 1 and another witness A.P.W. 2 Rama Shankar Tiwari whereas petitioner in his oral evidence has produced himself as O.P.W.1. In the documentary evidence the opposite party no.2 has produced a certificate issued by Pradhan and a copy of family register. Petitioner has produced pay certificate. Due to the absence of the petitioner case proceeded as exparte. An affidavit was filed. The opposite party no.2 has supported the exparte case through her affidavit which was not controverted by the petitioner. Due to which the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. presented by the opposite party no.2 was allowed exparte and petitioner was directed to pay Rs.1,500/- as maintenance allowance to her."
The aforementioned order dated 25.6.2007 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division) East/Judicial Magistrate, Ballia (supra) was assailed in criminal revsion no.232 of 2007 (Parashuram Singh Vs. Sushila Devi) before the learned court of Sessions Judge, Ballia. The revision was dismissed by the learned court of Sessions Judge, Ballia vide its order dated 28.9.2007.
After hearing the learned counsel for both the parties and perusal of the record, the learned court of Sessions Judge, Ballia has concluded that the revisionist was paying Rs.1000/- per month as maintenance allowance which was enhanced as Rs.1,500/- per month. The revisionist has admitted that he was getting Rs.6,500/- per month salary and owned 11 bighas of agricultural land.
There is no illegality, perversity or infirmity in the impugned orders. The writ petition lacks merits and is liable to be dismissed.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed on merits.
Order Date :- 23.11.2017/S.Sharma
