This criminal revision challenges a lower court order awarding maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. The High Court dismissed the revision, finding no jurisdictional error or illegality as the maintenance amount was not excessive.
Dismissed the criminal revision as devoid of merits and lacking jurisdictional error or illegality.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:106936
Court No. - 83
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2274 of 2023
Revisionist :- Imran Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Mohd. Kalim,Mary Puncha (Sheeb Jose) Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
[Krishan Pahal, J.]
Order Date :- 16.5.2023/ Vikas
Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned maintenance order is liable to be set aside due to lack of appreciation of income sources.
Whether the revisionist is entitled to maintenance consideration given the absence of income and absence of matrimonial obligations by respondent no.1.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Imran
State Of U.P.
Krishan Pahal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
