Amit Kumar Rana vs State Of U.P. And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 11952 ALL

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 11952 ALL
Judgement Date : 19 April, 2023

Allahabad High Court

Amit Kumar Rana vs State Of U.P. And Another on 19 April, 2023

Bench: Jyotsna Sharma




HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 93
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1804 of 2019
 

 
Revisionist :- Amit Kumar Rana
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Revisionist :- Ram Bilas Prasad
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Krishna Kumar Patel
 

 
Hon'ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma,J.

01. Heard Sri Ram Bilas Prasad, learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

02. By means of this criminal revision the revisionist has challenged the order and judgment dated 06.03.2019 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Bijnor passed in Case No.175 of 2016 whereby learned trial court directed the revisionist husband to pay Rs.3000/- per month as maintenance to his wife from the date of application i.e. from 28.04.2016.

03. The only point stressed before me by the revisionist is that the respondent no.2, his wife got remarried on 26.01.2020 with one Manoj Kumar, therefore, she is not entitled for any maintenance amount. It may usefully be noted that respondent no.2 filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. on 28.04.2016 i.e. much earlier than the date of alleged marriage and that she was granted maintenance from the date of application only. It may be noted that under the provision of Section 127 Cr.P.C., on proof of change in the circumstances of a person who is receiving any monthly maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C.,the Magistrate/court concerned may make such alteration in the order of maintenance as he thinks fit. The court concerned has power to cancel any order which was passed by it under Section 125 Cr.P.C. in favour a woman, from the date of her remarriage. Thus it is clear from the above provision, that in case of such an eventuality, he may apply in the court concerned for cancellation of the order. This fact can not be decided in the instant revision.

04. No other point has been pressed before me.

05. I went through the order in question. It is well reasoned speaking order requiring no interference specially in the wake of submission of learned counsel for the revisionist that he does not seek to press any other point of fact or of law.

06. Hence this revision is dismissed.

Order Date :- 19.4.2023

Asha