In this criminal revision, the Court examined the record of a rejected maintenance application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Finding no manifest error or procedural illegality, the revision was dismissed and any interim order was vacated.
The criminal revision has been dismissed. Any interim order stands vacated.
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. - 84
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1495 of 2005
Revisionist :- Swati Devi Opposite Party :- Sohit Yadav Counsel for Revisionist :- Dr.Pradeep Kumar Mishra
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
Order Date :- 22.9.2022 AK
Digitally signed by AWADESH KUMAR Date: 2022.09.23 14:40:55 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether there is any manifest error or illegality in the rejection of maintenance application by the Family Court that warrants interference in criminal revision.
Whether the impugned order dated 08.12.2004 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. requires correction under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C.
3 provisions across 1 enactments
Swati Devi
Sohit Yadav
Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
