Dismissed

Dr. Naresh Agrawal v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC22 May 2018CRLR/71/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal revision against a maintenance order under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was dismissed. The High Court found no illegality in the lower court's decision, noting that the Magistrate had accepted the pay of Rs. 30,242.50/- over the appellant's claimed income and that the wife lacked independent means.

What did the court decide?

The criminal revision was dismissed; the maintenance order dated 15.11.2010 directing the payment of Rs. 5,000/- monthly to the wife was upheld.

Dr. Naresh Agrawal Vs State of U.P. and Anr. — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 28

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 71 of 2011

¶3

Revisionist :- Dr. Naresh Agrawal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Revisionist :- Imran Ullah Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate, J.P.S. Jadaun

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶5

List has been revised. Learned counsel for the revisionist is not present to argue the case. Heard learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A., for the State.

¶6

This criminal revision has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 15.11.2010 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 6, Aligarh in Case No. 211/11/10 (Smt. Pallavi Vs. Dr. Naresh Agrawal) whereby the application of the opposite party no. 2 (Smt. Pallavi) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., was allowed and revisionist (Dr. Naresh Agrawal) was directed to pay monthly maintenance of Rs. 5,000/- to his wife (Smt. Pallavi) from the date of order, i.e. to say 15.11.2010.

¶7

Brief facts of the case are that Smt. Pallavi was married with revisionist (Dr. Naresh Agrawal) on 17.4.2002. After that she was subjected to cruelty and harassed by her husband and her in-laws for demand of dowry. On 11.11.2002 at about 4:00 PM, she was compelled to leave her matrimonial home, since then, she is living at her parental home. She has no means to maintain herself. Her husband is doctor and earns Rs. 25,000/- per month.

¶8

Grounds taken in the revision is that opposite party no. 2 (Smt. Pallavi) has sufficient means to maintain herself. Earning of the revisionist (Dr. Naresh Agrawal) is only Rs. 11464/-. He is also liable to maintain his parents.

¶9

Learned Magistrate held that opposite party no. 2 (Smt. Pallavi) has no mean to maintain herself. Monthly pay of revisionist (Dr. Naresh Agrawal) is Rs. 30242.50/- as per pay certificate for the month of January 2009.

¶10

Accordingly, the order dated 15.11.2010 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 6, Aligarh in Case No. 211/11/10 (Smt. Pallavi Vs. Dr. Naresh Agrawal) is based on evidence and is not perverse. I find no illegality in the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate.

¶11

In view of above, this criminal revision stands dismissed.

¶12

Order Date :- 22.5.2018 Jaswant

Dr. Naresh Agrawal v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Naresh Agrawal v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.P. Nanda and Another Vs State

Dori Lal Vs State of U.P.

Sushil Vs State and Other

Gul Mohammad and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Devanand Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Usman Ali Ansari Vs State of U.P. and Others