Dismissed

Megh Singh @ Megharaj Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC9 Oct 2023CRLR/2564/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a criminal revision challenging a Section 125 Cr.P.C. maintenance award. The court held that the awarded maintenance was not excessive, noting an adverse inference due to the husband’s nondisclosure of income, and dismissed the petition while directing arrears payment.

What did the court decide?

Criminal revision dismissed; however, petitioner directed to pay arrears in six equal monthly installments.

Megh Singh @ Megharaj Singh Vs State of U.P. and… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:194107

¶2

Court No. - 79

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2564 of 2023 Revisionist :- Megh Singh @ Megharaj Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Ravi Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶6

This criminal revision has been filed by the revisionist against the judgment and order dated 14.02.2023, passed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court No. 1, Aligarh, in Case No. 56/11 of 2012 (Smt. Poonam Devi vs. Megh Singh), under Section 125 Cr.P.C., by which the application filed by opposite party no. 2 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was allowed and the revisionist was directed to pay Rs. 3,000/- per month to opposite party no. 2, who is wife of revisionist.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that the maintenance awarded by the learned family court to the opposite party no. 2 is very excessive and without considering the monthly income of the revisionist. It is further submitted that the opposite party no. 2 is working as Anganbadi Karyakarti and is earning Rs. 3,500/- per month, as such, she is fully able to maintain herself. Lastly, it is submitted that the learned family court without considering the comparative hardship of the revisionist has awarded a very huge amount of maintenance in favour of opposite party no. 2.

¶8

Admittedly, the opposite party no.2 is legally married wife of revisionist. The revisionist being husband of opposite party no. 2 is morally bound to discharge his legal obligation of maintaining his wife in any circumstances. The husband cannot be heard to say that he is not in a position to earn enough to be able to maintain his wife. In the present case as the revisionist has not frankly disclosed his income, an adverse inference can be drawn against him.

¶9

Now it is the settled position of law that when the husband does not disclose to the court the exact amount of his income and the question of maintenance of wife arises, the presumption would be against the husband and the obligation of the husband is on a higher pedestal.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in mind the spiraling inflation rate and high cost of living index, the Court is of the view that maintenance at the rate of Rs. 3,000/- per month in favour of the wife cannot treated to be on higher side rather it is too meagre.

¶11

In view of above, there is no illegality, infirmity or perversity in the impugned order which may warrant any interference by this Court. No ground for interference is made out. The criminal revision filed by husband is liable to be dismissed.

¶12

The criminal revision is dismissed, accordingly.

¶13

However, it is provided that the revisionist shall pay the entire arrears as up to date in six equal monthly installments to the opposite party no. 2, failing which, it is open to opposite party no. 2 to execute the judgment and order dated 14.02.2023, passed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court No. 1, Aligarh, in Case No. 56/11 of 2012 (Smt. Poonam Devi vs. Megh Singh), under Section 125 Cr.P.C.

¶14

Order Date :- 9.10.2023

¶15

sailesh

¶16

Digitally signed by :- SAILESH PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Megh Singh @ Megharaj Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Megh Singh @ Megharaj Singh 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

Omvir Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Ankit Jain and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Birendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mohammad Faisal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Versha and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Radha Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others