Revisionist failed to appear to press the criminal revision challenging a maintenance order. The High Court, after reviewing the impugned order, found no illegality or perversity and dismissed the revision.
Bill of costs to the opposite party in case of presentment of the petition.
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. - 87
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1133 of 2004
Revisionist :- Jumma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Javed Habib Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.
Case called out in revised list. No one is present on behalf of revisionist to press this revision. However, learned A.G.A. for the State is present.
This criminal revision has been filed against the judgement and order dated 20.2.2004 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Rampur in Criminal Revision No. 13 of 2003, Smt. Hashmi alias Kallo Vs. State of U.P. and another, under Section 125 Cr.P.C., whereby modifying the judgement and order dated 27.6.2001 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division)/A.C.J.M, Rampur in Criminal Case No. 48 of 2000, Smt. Hashmi alias Kallo and others Vs. Jumma, by which, the learned Magistrate has awarded a sum of Rs. 500/- per month as maintenance allowance to the revisionist w.e.f. from 20.9.2001 to 1.2.2001 and a sum of Rs. 400/- per month to his son, Rizwan, till he attains the age of majority; to the extent that the opposite party no. 2 is entitled to get maintenance at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month from 20.9.2000 onwards till further order.
I have gone through the impugned judgement and order and I do not find that the impugned order suffers from any illegality or infirmity requiring any interference by this Court. There is no material to demonstrate that the impugned order is either perverse or vitiated by any legal infirmity.
The revision lacks merits and is accordingly dismissed.
Let a copy of this order be transmitted to the concerned Court below.
Order Date :- 11.11.2022 SA
Digitally signed by SALMAN ALI Date: 2022.11.16 10:17:13 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the criminal revision alleging illegality or infirmity in the maintenance order requires interference.
State of U.P.
Gautam Chowdhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
