Criminal Revision dismissed as the revisionist was absent and no merit was had; no illegality found in the lower court's maintenance order.
Revision dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 23 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2116 of 2000 Revisionist :- Mahtab Alam Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Mukhtar Alam Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.
Called in the revise. No one is present on behalf of the revisionist to press this revision. Learned AGA is appeared on behalf of State.
This criminal revision has been directed against the impugned judgment and order dated 26.4.2000 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, (Ist Class), Najibabad in Misc. Case No.119 of 1997, 'Smt. Taslima versus Mahtab Alam' whereby Rs.400/- has been awarded to the opposite party no.3, Rs. 250 each has been awarded to the two children of opposite party no. 3, total Rs.900/- per month for maintenance has been awarded to the opposite party no. 3 on application under Section 125 Cr.P.C.
Heard learned AGA for the State and perused the material available on record.
From perusal of impugned order, material available on record and having heard the learned AGA, I see no illegality or irregularity committed by the Court below in passing the impugned order. I also do not find any good ground to interfere in the same. No interference is warranted. The amount granted to opposite party no. 3 does not appear to be excessive.
Moreover, it appears that either cause of action or any interest to the revisionist no more survives or by efflux of time revisionist lost interest in the matter or it has otherwise become infructuous and probably for this reasons, none is interested to have decided this matter on merit and that is why counsel for the revisionist is absent.
Revision is dismissed accordingly.
Order Date :- 1.3.2019 / Manoj
Mahtab Alam
State Of U.P.
Rajendra Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
