Dismissed

Shashi Kant v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC23 Sept 2021CRLR/2143/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal revision challenging an order granting interim maintenance to a wife, the Court observed that the revisionist failed to point out any material error or perversity. The claim of separation was countered by evidence of reunions and birth of a child. The revision was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The revision stands dismissed; the interim maintenance order remains operative pending final order.

Shashi Kant Vs State of U.P. and Another — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 84

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2143 of 2021

¶3

Revisionist :- Shashi Kant Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Prem Chandra Patel Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Prem Chandra Patel, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Gyan Prakash Singh, learned State Law Officer, appearing the State-opposite party no.1.

¶6

The present revision has been filed against the judgment and order dated 05.04.2021 passed by the Additional Principal Judge/Family Judge, Court No.4, Jaunpur in Case No. 949 of 2020, Santara vs. Shashi Kant, under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Jaunpur, whereby allowed the interim maintenance of Rs. 1500/- per month since the date of institution of application.

¶7

The only ground which is sought to be raised to challenge the order granting interim maintenance is that the parties were living separately since the year 2015.

¶8

Learned State Law Officer points out that as per the version of the opposite party no.2, in her application, filed under Section 125 Cr.P.C., it is asserted that she was thrown own from her matrimonial home in the year 2015 and thereafter with the intervention of the family members and well-wishers she went back to her husband in the month of November, 2016 and a daughter was born to her in the month of December, 2017, and again in August, 2019 she was beaten up and thrown out of her matrimonial home.

¶9

It is submitted that in view of the aforestated facts the revisionist cannot disown the liability of paying maintenance to his wife and children in a situation where she has no other source of income as noted by the court below. It is further pointed out that the order directing payment of interim maintenance would be subject to final orders to be passed in proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and the Family Judge while passing the order dated 05.04.2021 had fixed a date for evidence.

¶10

Counsel for the revisionist has not been able to point out any material error, illegality or perversity in the order passed by the court below so as to warrant interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction of this Court.

¶11

The revision stands accordingly dismissed.

¶12

Order Date :- 23.9.2021 Imroz

¶13

(Dr. Y. K. Srivastava, J.)

Shashi Kant v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shashi Kant v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Rajaram and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ved Prakash Mishra and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shatrughan Mani Sharma and Another Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Srikant Vs State of U.P.

Aadesh Kumar Yadav and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd. Irshad Vs State of U.P.