Vinod Kumar Rao vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 14318 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 66
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 15103 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Rao
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Dhirendra Pratap Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

Heard counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA for the State- opposite party no. 1 and perused the record.

The present application has been filed with the prayer to set aside the impugned order dated 15.03.2022 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Gorakhpur in Criminal Case No. 295 of 2019, Sudha Kumar vs. Vinod Kumar Rao, under Section 125 Cr.P.C., whereby the applicant has been directed to pay maintenance of Rs. 18,000/- per month to the opposite party no. 2 and Rs. 7,000/- per month to the opposite party no. 3 from the date of application.

Only submission of the counsel for the applicant to challenge the order impugned is that the maintenance awarded to the opposite party nos 2 and 3 is excessive.

From the perusal of the record it is not in dispute that the applicant is working as a Medical Officer. If the earning capacity of the applicant is taken into consideration, the amount fixed by the court concerned as maintenance cannot be said to be exorbitant or excessive. A wife and a daughter are also entitled to live within the befitting standard of husband.

Reference may also be made to the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Rajnesh v. Neha, reported in (2021) 2 SCC 324. Noticing the law of maintenance as discussed by the Apex Court in the aforesaid judgment, this Court does not find any good ground to interfere in the impugned order. The impugned order is just and proper and does not suffer from any illegality, infirmity or jurisdictional error.

The present application being devoid of merit is accordingly dismissed.

Order Date :- 5.5.2023

Sachin Mishra