Partly allowed

Gunjeet Kaur and Anr. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC3 Aug 2022/650/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed the condonation of delay in filing a criminal revision seeking enhancement of maintenance awarded under Section 125 Cr.P.C. The High Court found no error in the Family Court's order and refused to modify it, directing petitioners to approach the Family Court for revision under Section 126(2).

What did the court decide?

Application for condonation of delay allowed; revision disposed of holding no error in impugned order; liberty to approach Family Court for revision under Section 126(2).

Gunjeet Kaur and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr. — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 10

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION DEFECTIVE No. - 650 of 2020

¶3

Revisionist :- Gunjeet Kaur And Anr. Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Revisionist :- Arjun Singh Kalhans,Ankit Tiwari,Shailender Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

( Application No.78200 of 2020 )

¶6

1. The application seeks condonation of delay in filing the revision.

¶7

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant.

¶8

3. Cause shown in the affidavit filed in support of the application is sufficient to condone the delay.

¶9

4. The application is allowed.

¶10

5. Delay in filing the revision is condoned.

¶11

(Order on Memo)

¶12

6. Present revision under Section 19(4) of the Family Court Act, 1984 read with Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been filed against the judgment and order dated 11.07.2019 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Gonda in Criminal Case No.707 of 2017, under Section 125 Cr.P.C. (Smt. Gunjeet Kaur & Anr vs Manpreet Singh Bhatia & Ors).

¶13

7. Learned counsel for the revisionists submits that learned Family Court while allowing the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. has not appreciated the evidence in its correct perspective and awarded meager amount of maintenance to the revisionists. Opposite party No.2 is working as State Head in United Spirits Ltd., a Multinational Company, and his monthly salary is more than Rs.2,50,000/-. He, therefore, submits that impugned order dated 11.07.2019 may be modified by enhancing the maintenance in favour of the revisionists.

¶14

8. I have gone through the judgment and order dated 11.07.2019 and do not

¶15

find any error committed by learned Family Court. This court, at this stage, cannot appreciate the evidence. The revisionists may approach the learned Family Court under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C. for modification of the order in view of the change circumstance, if any.

¶16

9. The revision is disposed of with aforesaid liberty.

¶17

( Dinesh Kumar Singh, J. )

¶18

Order Date :- 3.8.2022 prateek

¶19

Digitally signed by PRATEEK ARORA Date: 2022.08.03 18:15:42 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Gunjeet Kaur and Anr. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gunjeet Kaur and Anr. 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

Denesh Kumar Verma and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

State of U.P. Minor B/C Vs Arif Anwar Hashmi

Manoj Kumar Shukla and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ghanshyam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Nooruddin Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rizwan Khan Vs State of U.P. and Ors.