Arbind Kumar Upadhyay vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 4300 Jhar

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                 Cr. Rev. No. 1445 of 2017
                  Arbind Kumar Upadhyay                    ...                           ...     Petitioner

                                                 Versus
                  1. The State of Jharkhand
                  2. Anju Devi                                        ...           ... Opp. Parties.
                                                ---

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

---

              For the Petitioner         : Mr. P.K. Sinha, Advocate
              For the State              : Mr. Sardhu Mahto, APP
              For the O.P. No.2         : Mr. P. Sharan, Advocate
                                                ---

The matter was taken up through Video Conferencing. Learned counsel for the parties had no objections with it and submitted that the audio and video qualities are good.

---

10/20.11.2021: Heard the parties.

This criminal revision has been filed by the revisionist against the order dated 31.08.2017 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Palamau at Daltonganj in Maintenance Petition No.12 of 2014 by which application filed by Opp. Party has been allowed by directing the petitioner to give Rs.7,000/- per month to the wife, as maintenance.

Except quantum of maintenance, other factors are not in dispute. It has been submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is Compounder and he earns less than Rs.7000/- per month and as such, he is not able to give maintenance amount to the wife. On the above facts, maintenance has been challenged.

On the other hand counsel for the Opp. Party has supported the impugned order.

From perusal of the impugned order and the materials available on the record, it appears that the husband is Compounder and earns Rs.15,000/- per month. The court below has occasion to interact with the parties and after assessing their status and other factors, quantum of maintenance has been decided.

Considering the quantum of maintenance and the finding recorded by the court below, I find no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment. Accordingly, it is hereby, dismissed.

In view of the dismissal of present criminal revision, pending I.A, if any, also stands disposed of.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

Ravi/-