Veer Singh Yadav vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others
2025 Latest Caselaw 358 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Veer Singh Yadav vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 1 May, 2025

Author: Subhash Chandra Sharma

Bench: Subhash Chandra Sharma

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:68828
 
Court No. - 79
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3364 of 2024
 

 
Revisionist :- Veer Singh Yadav
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Revisionist :- Santosh Kumar Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.
 

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the material on record.

This criminal revision has been filed with a prayer to allow the revision and set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 19.03.2024 passed by learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court-1, Kanpur Nagar, in Case No. 168 of 2018, (Smt. Sunita Yadav and two others Vs. Veer Singh Yadav) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Chakeri, District Kanpur Nagar.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the opposite party no. 2 is wife and opposite party no. 3 is daughter of the revisionist. It is further submitted that both are living in his paternal house and he maintains them and also pays money. Even though an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was moved by the wife for maintenance and the learned trial court has awarded the maintenance fixing the amount Rs. 3,000/- per month in favour of wife and Rs. 2,500/- per month in favour daughter. He further submits that he is making regular payment which was allowed by the learned trial court but now the daughter has become major, therefore, she is not entitled for maintenance from the date of majority. Since there is no neglect on the part of the revisionist with the wife and daughter, therefore, they are not entitled for maintenance but the learned trial court has not considered all these facts but passed the order dated 19.03.2024 illegally, therefore, request to set aside the judgment and order dated 19.03.2024 passed by the learned trial court and allow the revision.

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid.

On considering the facts and circumstances, submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. and perusal of record, the order passed by the learned trial court dated 19.03.2024, it appears that opposite party no. 2 is wife and opposite party no. 3 is daughter of the revisionist those are living in paternal house due to neglect and illtreatment of the husband/revisionist who is working as driver on contract in roadways. They are living neglected life and are unable to maintain themselves since she has no any income. The revisionist being husband is under legal obligation to maintain his wife and the minor child till attaining age of majority. According to pay slip Rs. 16,491/- is monthly income of the revisionist out of which Rs. 3,000/- per month in favour of wife and Rs. 2,500/- per month in favour of daughter cannot be said to be excessive and more than sufficient. In this way, there appears no any illegality or impropriety in the order passed by the learned trial court and does not warrant any interference by this Court.

So far as the statement of learned counsel for the revisionist is concerned that the opposite party no. 2, daughter has become major and revisionist has option to move an application before the learned trial court noting this fact it will pass appropriate order.

Accordingly, this criminal revision is disposed of finally.

Order Date :- 1.5.2025

Suraj Srivastav