Dismissed¶12

Rohit Kumar @ Rohit v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Allahabad HC27 Feb 2025CRLR/220/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 125 Cr.P.C. maintenance; criminal revision dismissed; Family Court Lakhimpur Kheri Case No.532 of 2019; order dated 21.1.2025; destitute legally wedded wife and minor daughters; cruelty relating to demand of dowry; residence away from husband for sufficient cause; adequate source of income; no maintenance paid since 2019; no illegality found; revisionist Rohit Kumar @ Rohit; State of U.P.; Justice Karunesh Singh Pawar; Court No.16; Lucknow Bench, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad; Order Date 27.2.2025; neutral citation 2025:AHC-LKO:11823.

What did the court decide?

None; the revision was dismissed and the impugned Family Court maintenance order was left uninterfered with. ¶12

Rohit Kumar @ Rohit Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the revision was dismissed and the impugned Family Court maintenance order was left uninterfered with.

¶12

Issue for consideration

Whether the judgment and order dated 21.1.2025 of the 3rd Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Lakhimpur Kheri in Case No.532 of 2019 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. suffers from illegality and warrants interference in the criminal revision.

¶8

Ratio / Principle

It is not in dispute that respondent no.2 is the legally wedded wife of the revisionist and respondent nos.3 and 4 are her minor daughters; respondent nos.2, 3 and 4 are destitute and incapable of maintaining themselves.

¶10

Key takeaways

Respondent no.2 is residing away from the revisionist for sufficient cause, having been subjected to cruelty relating to demand of dowry.ratio¶10
The revisionist has an adequate source of income and is capable of maintaining the respondents, but has neglected to maintain his wife and children.ratio¶10
No maintenance has been paid to the respondents by the revisionist till date (nothing shown as paid since 2019).ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Revision No.220 of 2025 (Lucknow Bench, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad; Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar, J.; decided 27.2.2025) challenging the judgment and order dated 21.1.2025 of the 3rd Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Lakhimpur Kheri in Case No.532 of 2019 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. — DISMISSED. The record showed it undisputed that respondent no.2 is the revisionist's legally wedded wife and respondent nos.3 and 4 her minor daughters, all three destitute and incapable of maintaining themselves; the wife resides apart for sufficient cause, having been subjected to cruelty relating to demand of dowry; the revisionist has an adequate source of income and is capable of maintaining them, yet on query by the court below could not show any payment since 2019, i.e., no maintenance had been paid till date. Finding no illegality in the impugned order, the court dismissed the revision as devoid of merit. No maintenance quantum is stated in the judgment.

Rohit Kumar @ Rohit v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit Kumar @ Rohit v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Preeti Singh vs Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

Sudhakar Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy. Home

Babu Ram vs District Magistrate,Gonda and 2 Others

Raj Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Dinesh Kumar @ Dinesh Sonkar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

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