Santosh Kumar @ Santosh Saini vs State Of U.P. And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 34978 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Santosh Kumar @ Santosh Saini vs State Of U.P. And Another on 13 December, 2023

Author: Vipin Chandra Dixit

Bench: Vipin Chandra Dixit

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?
 
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:236218
 
Court No. - 79
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2375 of 2023
 

 
Revisionist :- Santosh Kumar @ Santosh Saini
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Revisionist :- Vindeshwari Prasad,Arvind Kumar Sahu
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.
 

Despite service of notice, no one has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party no.2.

Heard Sri Arvind Kumar Sahu, learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

This criminal revision has been filed by the revisionist against the judgment and order dated 22.3.2023 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Aligarh in Criminal Misc. Case No.558 of 2019 (Smt. Ruchi Vs. Santosh Kumar), by which application filed by opposite party no.2 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was allowed and the revisionist was directed to pay Rs.3,000/- per month as maintenance to opposite party no.2, who is wife of revisionist.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that the revisionist is labourer having no fix income. Learned Family Court without recording any finding in respect of monthly income of the revisionist and without considering the comparative hardship of the revisionist, had awarded an excessive amount of maintenance in favour of opposite party no.2.

Admittedly, the opposite party no.2 is legally married wife of revisionist. The revisionist being husband of opposite party no.2 is morally bound to discharge his legal obligation of maintaining his wife in any circumstances. The husband cannot be heard to say that he is not in a position to earn enough to be able to maintain his wife.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in mind the spiralling inflation rate and high cost of living index, the Court is of the view that maintenance at the rate of Rs.3,000/- per month in favour of the wife cannot treated to be on higher side rather it is too meagre.

In view of above, there is no illegality, infirmity or perversity in the impugned order which may warrant any interference by this Court. No ground for interference is made out. The criminal revision filed by husband is liable to be dismissed.

The criminal revision is dismissed, accordingly.

However, it is provided that revisionist shall pay the entire arrears as on date in six equal monthly instalments to the opposite party no.2, failing which it is open to opposite party no.2 to initiate recovery proceedings against the revisionist.

Order Date :- 13.12.2023

Kpy