In this criminal revision, the Hon'ble Court rejected the petitioner's application for quashing the order rejecting restoration of maintenance and refund of apology bond deposited by him.
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. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2540 of 2018
Revisionist :- Atul Kumar Opposite Party :- Smt. Shilpa Counsel for Revisionist :- Ajay Rajendra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
This criminal revision has been directed against the impugned judgment and order dated 17.5.2018 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Muzaffarnagar rejecting restoration application being Misc. Case No.92 of 2011 (Atul Kumar vs. Smt. Shilpa and ex-parte order dated 11.11.2016 passed by Additional Principal Judge / Fast Track Court No. 4, Muzaffarnagar in Case No. 1457/11 of 2014, Smt. Shilpa and another vs. Atul Kumar, whereby application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was allowed.
Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that the parties have entered into a compromise, therefore, he does not want to press the present revision on merit. He further prayed that Rs. 10,000/- has been deposited by him in the Mediation Centre in compliance of Court's order for appearance of opposite party nos. 1 and 2. Since the opposite party nos. 1 and 2 did not turn up in the mediation centre, therefore, Rs. 7000/- out of that amount should be refunded to him.
Learned AGA for the State submits that criminal revision cannot be withdrawn and it has to be decided on merit.
From perusal of impugned orders, material available on record, I see no illegality or irregularity committed by the Court below in passing the impugned order. I do not find any good ground to interfere in the same. No interference is warranted.
Accordingly, the present revision is dismissed .
It is open to the revisionist to withdraw Rs. 7000/- deposited by him, from mediation centre in accordance with law.
All the applications pending in this revision stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 9.12.2019 Manoj
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Criminal Revision should be allowed or dismissed.
Whether the fixation of apology bond by mediation centre should be interfered.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Atul Kumar
Smt. Shilpa
Rajendra Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
