Allowed

Shakeel v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC4 May 2018CRLR/845/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal revision against an order fixing child and spousal maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. The court reduced the monthly maintenance award from Rs. 3,000 to Rs. 2,500 based on the revisionist's admitted income as a manual labourer, effective from the date of the impugned order.

What did the court decide?

Revision allowed; Maintenance reduced to Rs. 2,500 per month effective 15.01.2014.

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

¶1

Court No. - 28

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 845 of 2014 Revisionist :- Shakeel Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Revisionist :- Ashish Kumar Gupta,Mohammad Jaid Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Nanda Kumar Shukla,Nisar Uddin,Ziya Uddin Shadab

¶3

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P.

¶5

This revision has been preferred against the order dated 15.01.2014 passed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court/Additional District Judge, Court No. 12, Allahabad in Case No. 724 of 2008 (Reshma Bano v. Shakeel), whereby the application of opposite party no. 2 - Reshma Bano, under Section 125 Cr.P.C., was allowed and revisionist Shakeel was directed to pay his wife Reshma Bano maintenance amounting to Rs. 3,000/- per month from the date of order.

¶6

As per facts of the case, opposite party no. 2 Reshma Bano was married to revisionist Shakeel on 16.10.2007. After marriage, Shakeel did not take his wife Reshma Bano to her matrimonial home and refused to maintain her.

¶7

Learned counsel for the revisionist contended that there is no evidence on record to show that income of the revisionist is Rs. 15,000/- . Learned court below has determined the income of the revisionist without any evidence.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 contended that there is no illegality in the impugned order passed by the court below.

¶9

Revisionist Shakeel has admitted that he earns Rs. 80/- per day by doing manual labour. The earning of a manual labour cannot be more than Rs. 300-400/- per day. Accordingly, in no way revisionist Shakeel Ahmed may earn more than Rs. 10,000/- per month. In view of above, maintenance amounting to Rs. 3,000/- per month awarded by the court below is excessive.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be appropriate to fix amount of maintenance to Rs. 2,500/- per month.

¶11

Accordingly, the instant revision is allowed . Revisionist Shakeel is directed to pay Rs. 2,500/- per month to his wife opposite party no. 2 Reshma Bano from 15.01.2014, i.e. date of order passed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court/Additional District Judge, Court No. 12, Allahabad.

¶12

Order Date :- 4.5.2018 I. Batabyal

Shakeel v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shakeel 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

Mustafa Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sunil Dutt Vs State of U.P.

Lallu Singh and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Suresh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anil and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arjun Gangwar Juvenile Vs State of U.P. and Another