Sanjay Kumar vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 2723 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 82
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 13 of 2022
 

 
Revisionist :- Sanjay Kumar
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Revisionist :- Ajay Kumar Vashistha
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ram Jatan Yadav
 

 
Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A.

The present criminal revision has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 7.9.2021 passed in Misc. Case No. 65 of 2020 (Smt. Joyti and another Vs. Sanjay Kumar), under Section 125 Cr.P.C. passed by the Court Officer, Village Court, Patiyali, Kasganj, by which an award of maintenance in the tune of Rs. 2,000/- per month for opposite party no. 2 and Rs. 1000/- per month for opposite party no. 3 from the date of application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. till the date of order i.e. 7.9.2021 and thereafter, Rs. 3,000/- per month to the opposite party no. 2 and Rs. 2,000/- per month to the opposite party no. 3, total amount of Rs. 5,000/- per month, has been passed.

Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that the impugned judgement and order was passed without appreciating the evidence and not recording any satisfactory reasons regarding the income of the revisionist. It is also submitted that opposite party no. 2 is a very rude and rigid lady and she made a pressure upon the revisionist to left out of the old parents and when the applicant denied to do so, then after annoyed she used to go her maternal house and made a pressure to live with any other place after left his old parents.

Perusal of the record shows that the marriage between the parties is not disputed. The record also reflects that no any arrangement for maintenance was ever made by revisionist.

Learned Court below has taken much pain in analyzing the evidence adduced before him. Hence, the finding recorded by the learned trial Court has no infirmity or illegality and the maintenance awarded by the Court below cannot be considered as excessive taking into account the sky touching prices of the essential commodities.

In view of the discussion made above, I do not find any perversity or illegality in the order impugned and there is no justifiable ground for making any interference in it. Hence, the revision fails and it is hereby dismissed.

However, the revisionist shall pay the entire maintenance amount regularly, as directed by the Court below including the arrears to opposite party nos. 2 and 3, within a period of two months. If continuous default of two months is made then opposite party no. 2 shall be at liberty to get the amount of maintenance recovered in accordance with law.

Order Date :- 13.5.2022

Shafique