Basori Lal Sahu vs Smt. Jyoti Bai Sahu
2022 Latest Caselaw 7043 MP

                               1
         IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                      AT JABALPUR

                             BEFORE
                 HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE ANJULI PALO
                       ON THE 10th OF MAY, 2022

             CRIMINAL REVISION No. 2763 of 2021

       Between:-
       BASORI LAL SAHU S/O SUMMER SAHU ,
       AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
       RETD. TEACHER WARD NO. 6 NEAR
       DURGA MANDIR TEHDUKHEDA DIST.
       DAMOH MP (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                        .....PETITIONER
       (BY SHRI P.K. TIWARI, ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER )

       AND

       SMT. JYOTI BAI SAHU D/O LATE GULAB
       PRASAD SAHU W/O SHRI BASORI LAL
       SAHU , AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
       OCCUPATION: HOUSE WIFE LAL KUWA
       BEHIND ATUL VELDING H.NO. 2880
       POLIPATHAR     GWARIGHAT     ROAD
       JABALPUR MP (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                      .....RESPONDENT
       (BY SHRI J.K. KAUSHAL, ADVOCATE FOR THE
       RESPONDENTS)

      This revision coming on for order this day, the court passed the
following:
                                ORDER

T his revision under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Cr.P.C.) has been filed by the applicant being aggrieved by the order dated 24.09.2021 passed by the First Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Jabalpur, in MJC

No.19/2021 whereby the respondent has preferred the application under Section 125 of CrPC along with an application for grant of interim maintenance.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he has filed an application and make an objection before the court below that application of Section 125 is not maintainable before this court because the respondent is permanently residing at Kundam and after marriage of the respondent with the applicant, both are living at Tendukheda, District Damoh. The order of the Court below is bad in law. The Court below has committed error while passing the order dated 24.09.2021. Therefore, the said order is liable to be set aside.

Learned counsel for the respondent has opposed the prayer made by the applicant's counsel and prayed for dismissal of the revision.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

After perusal of the record, it appears that the Trial Court rightly held that the question of jurisdiction shall be decided after producing evidence of both the sides. Therefore, after perusing the impugned order of the lower Court, it appears that there is no illegality, perversity and irregularity found in the judgment passed by the trial Court.

Hence, this revision is hereby dismissed.

(SMT. ANJULI PALO) JUDGE VD

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by VARSHA DUBEY Date: 2022.05.12 18:33:40 IST