Allahabad High Court

Ram Niwas vs State Of U.P. & 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:68451
 
Court No. - 79
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2407 of 2024
 

 
Revisionist :- Ram Niwas
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. & 2 Others
 
Counsel for Revisionist :- Amit Kumar Pandey
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

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

This criminal revision has been filed by the revisionist with prayer to set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 07.03.2024 passed by the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Court No. 1, Bareilly in Criminal Misc. Case No. 943 of 2018 (Smt. Nanhi Devi and another Vs. Ram Niwas), under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Hafizganj, District Bareilly.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case, the opposite party nos. 2 and 3 are wife and daughter and are living separate from him without any reasonable excuse. An application us/ 125 Cr.P.C. was filed by her which was allowed by the learned trial court. Later on, an application u/s 127 Cr.P.C. for enhancement of the amount for maintenance was filed and it was decided by the learned trial court by fixing the amount Rs. 3000/- per month to the wife and Rs. 2500/- per month to the daughter. Learned trial court did not consider the paying capacity and income of the husband/revisionist but enhanced the amount which is excessive. The other liabilities of the revisionist were also not considered by the learned trial court, therefore, request to set aside the order passed by the learned trial court and to reduce the amount.

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

On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. perusal of record and order passed by the learned trial court, it appears undisputedly that the opposite party nos. 2 and 3 are wife and daughter of the revisionist. In case No. 1128 of 2008 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. vide order dated 08.09.2011 the amount of maintenance Rs. 1000/- per month to the wife and Rs. 500 to the daughter were fixed by the learned trial court. When the application u/s 127 Cr.P.C. was moved before the learned trial court, it was disclosed by the father of the revisionist that his son (the revisionist) works as compounder but the revisionist has not disclosed his income before the learned trial court but concealed it. The learned trial court has assessed the income of the revisionist and fixed the amount of Rs. 3000/- to the wife and Rs. 2500/- per month to the daughter which 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 learned trial court but this criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed.

Accordingly, the present revision is dismissed at the admission stage.

Order Date :- 1.5.2025

Anurag Singh