Allahabad High Court
Smt. Reeta Singh vs State Of U.P. And Others on 12 December, 2022
Bench: Syed Aftab Rizvi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 88
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3790 of 2003
Revisionist :- Smt. Reeta Singh
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Others
Counsel for Revisionist :- Sahab Tiwari,Saurabh Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Man Bahadur Singh
Hon'ble Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi,J.
Case taken up in the revised call. None is present either for the revisionist or for the O.P. No. 2. Learned A.G.A. is present.
This criminal revision is filed against the judgment and order dated 11.9.2003 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Azamgarh.
The brief facts of the case are that revisionist filed an application U/s 125 Cr.P.C. for maintenance for herself and her minor daughter. It was alleged that marriage of the applicant Reeta Singh was solemnized with opposite party Shilendra Kumar Singh in the year 1987. At that time applicant no. 1 was undergoing studies and used to live at her Mayaka as opposite party was unable to bear her expenses of studies. However, at regular intervals applicant also used to visit her in-laws house. After sometime opposite party and his family members started demand of dowry. Meanwhile, a daughter was born to the applicant. The opposite party and his family members started to torture the applicant no. 1 and threatened to annule the marriage. They also castigated her for characterlessness. Elder brother of opposite party also tried to outrage her modesty. The opposite party filed a case of divorce before the family court and he is not willing to perform his marital obligations. He is not maintaining the applicants. He has also retained the ornaments and other valuable articles of the applicant no. 1. He has got signed some blank papers after giving threats of suicide. The opposite party is doing service and earn a reasonable income while applicant is unable to maintain herself. The opposite party filed his written statements. He admitted the fact of marriage. He further alleged that at the time of marriage opposite party was also pursuing studies and used to live in hostel. He completed his M.A. final examination in 1995 and till then lived at Allahabad in the hostel. One daughter Ankita was born in 1993. Making other allegations it was averred that applicant no. 1 has illicit relation with her brother-in-law and one Sunil Kumar Shahi. She has admitted this before the opposite party and has also got it written. Both the parties adduced evidence and the learned trial court by the impugned order partly allowed the maintenance application for applicant no. 2 the minor daughter and awarded her Rs. 500/- monthly maintenance allowance and for applicant no. 1 the learned trial court has rejected the maintenance application. Aggrieved with this criminal revision has been filed by applicant no. 1.
The learned court below has narrated the entire facts, the pleadings and the evidence adduced by the parties. It has also analyzed the entire evidence on record. The learned court below has given the finding that applicant no. 1 is the legally wedded wife of opposite party and applicant no. 2 is their daughter. Learned court below has further observed that from the evidence on record it stands proved that applicant no. 1 was living adulterous life. On this ground the learned court below has rejected her application for maintenance while granted maintenance to the minor daughter applicant no. 2. The finding recorded by the court below appears to be just and proper. There is no perversity or illegality in the finding recorded by it. There is cogent evidence on record to establish that revisionist/applicant no. 1 was unchaste and she has made extramarital relation with other persons. So there is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order and it does not need any interference.
The criminal revision is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed.
Order Date :- 12.12.2022
Masarrat
