Amit Kumar Singh @ Alok vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 3921 Jhar

                                     -1-

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                Cr. Revision No.416 of 2017
                            With
                     I.A. No.9253 of 2017

       Amit Kumar Singh @ Alok                        ......       Petitioner
                                 Versus
       The State of Jharkhand                         ......   Opp. Party
                                 ---------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

---------

       For the Petitioner        : None
       For the State             : Mr. Ashok Kumar, A.P.P.
                                 ---------

The matter was taken up through Video Conferencing. Learned counsel for the party(s) had no objection with it and submitted that the audio and video qualities are good.

---------

                 th
09/Dated: 20          October, 2021

1. On repeated calls, nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. Ashok Kumar, learned A.P.P is present.

2. The present revision application has been filed against the order dated 24.11.2016, by the court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Jamshedpur, in Misc. Case No.158 of 2009, whereby the maintenance has been awarded in favour of wife amounting to Rs.3,000/- (three thousand) per month from the date of filing of the application.

3. It has been submitted by the learned A.P.P that the matter relates to matrimonial dispute. The court below after considering the arguments of the parties and the evidence brought on record, has granted meager maintenance amount of Rs.3,000/- (three thousand) per month in favour of the wife. It has further been submitted that the present revision application has been filed only to misuse the process of law.

4. Heard learned A.P.P. On perusal of the record, it appears that other parameters of the impugned judgment are not in dispute except the quantum of maintenance. The amount of Rs.3,000/- as maintenance is very meager amount, and as such no interference is required by this Court in the impugned order. Accordingly, the present criminal revision application is, hereby, dismissed.

5. I.A. No.9253 of 2017 also stands dismissed.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.) Chandan/-