Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 11196 ALL
Judgement Date : 24 August, 2022
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 10 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 936 of 2021 Revisionist :- Smt. Amrita Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Revisionist :- Vivekanand Pandey, Harish Chandra Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mahendra Kumar Sharma Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Rao Narendra Singh, learned AGA.
2. The present revision under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act has been filed against the order dated 4.12.2021 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Shrawasti in Maintenance Case No.111/XI of 2015, whereby the learned Family Court has rejected the application filed by the revisionist under Section 125 Cr.P.C.
3. I have gone through the impugned judgment and order of the trial court carefully and perused the evidence on record.
4. I do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned judgement and order inasmuch as the trial court after considering the evidence, has come to this conclusion that the revisionist has failed to establish the fact that she is legally wedded wife of opposite party no.2, therefore, she is not entitled for any maintenance. The view taken by the court below is neither perverse nor illegal. Therefore, this Court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction does not want to interfere with the impugned judgement and order.
5. Revision being without any merit and substance, is dismissed.
Order Date :- 24.8.2022
Rao/-
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!