Sanjay Kumar Singh vs State Of U.P. And Anr.
2022 Latest Caselaw 20307 ALL

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 20307 ALL
Judgement Date : 7 December, 2022

Allahabad High Court

Sanjay Kumar Singh vs State Of U.P. And Anr. on 7 December, 2022

Bench: Saroj Yadav




HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 14
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 936 of 2018
 

 
Revisionist :- Sanjay Kumar Singh
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr.
 
Counsel for Revisionist :- Irfan Khan, Sanjay Kumar Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J.

Case called out.

None turned up on behalf of the revisionist to press this revision.

Shri Shailendra Tripathi, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State respondent is present.

This revision has been filed by the revisionist against the order dated 19.05.2018 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No. 10, Lucknow in Criminal Appeal No. 243 of 2017, Sharmila Singh Versus Sanjay Kumar Singh, under Section 29 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005, whereby allowed the Criminal Appeal of the respondent no. 2 setting aside the judgment and order dated 04.08.2017 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Court No.26, Lucknow in Complaint Case No. 4036 of 2013, Sharmila Singh Versus Sanjay Kumar Singh, under Section 12 of the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 relating to Police Station Ashiyana, District Lucknow and directed the revisionist to pay maintenance amount to the tune of Rs. 20,000/- per month to the respondent no. 2.

Heard learned A.G.A. for the State respondent.

Learned A.G.A. submitted that there is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order and the same is perfectly within the precincts of law. Hence the present revision has no force and should be dismissed.

Considered the submissions advanced by the learned A.G.A. and perused the material available on record.

The court below has given cogent, convincing and satisfactory reasons while passing the impugned order. Reasons mentioned therein are good enough to satisfy the passing of impugned order and no fault could be found with the approach adopted by the court below. Even otherwise also, none has appeared on behalf of the revisionist to press this revision though the revision is pending since 2018.

In view of the above, I do not find any illegality, infirmity or perversity in the impugned order which may warrant any interference.

The revision is, accordingly, dismissed.

(Mrs. Saroj Yadav, J.)

Order Date :- 7.12.2022

Arun