Allahabad High Court
Abdul Gaffar vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 22 September, 2023
Bench: Vipin Chandra Dixit
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:184531
Court No. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1067 of 2023
Revisionist :- Abdul Gaffar
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Revisionist :- Subhash Chandra Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mazhar Ullah
Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.
Heard Sri S.C. Pandey, learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the State, Mr. Mazhar Ullah, learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party nos.2 & 3 and perused the record.
This criminal revision has been filed by the revisionist against the judgment and order dated 27.1.2023 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Rampur in Criminal Misc. Case No.246 of 2017 (Smt. Shabana and another Vs. Abdul Gaffar), by which application filed by opposite party nos.2 and 3 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was allowed and the revisionist was directed to pay Rs.3,000/- per month to wife/opposite party no.2 and Rs.2,000/- per month to minor daughter/opposite party no.3.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that learned Family Court had awarded a very excessive amount of maintenance in favour of opposite party nos.2 and 3. It is further submitted that the revisionist is Carpenter having income of Rs.4,000/- per month and learned Family Court without considering the comparative hardship of revisionist had awarded an excessive amount of maintenance in favour of opposite party nos.2 and 3.
On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party nos.2 and 3 states that the maintenance at the rate of Rs.3,000/- per month in favour of wife and Rs.2,000/- per month in favour of minor daughter as awarded by the Family Court cannot said to be excessive in any manner.
Admittedly, the opposite party no.2 is legally wedded wife of revisionist and opposite party no.3 is minor daughter of revisionist. The revisionist being husband of opposite party no.2 and father of opposite party no.3 is morally bound to discharge his legal obligation of maintaining his wife and minor daughter 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 and daughter.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in mind the spiraling 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 and Rs.2,000/- per month in favour of the minor daughter 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 up-to-date in six equal monthly instalments to the opposite party nos.2 and 3, failing which it is open to opposite party nos.2 and 3 to initiate recovery proceedings against the revisionist.
Order Date :- 22.9.2023
Kpy
