Smt Shubhra Garg Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:64703

Court No. - 79

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2816 of 2024

Revisionist :- Smt Shubhra Garg Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Ashish Kumar Singh,Raghav Arora Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

The present criminal revision has been filed with that revisionist be paid the enhanced amount as interim relief so fixed by this Hon'ble Court against the amount so directed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court No.2, Meerut, in Case No.161 of 2014 (Smt. Shubhra Garg vs. Smt. Manish Gupta) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Nauchandi, District Meerut.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the revisionist is wife of opposite party no.2 who is working on the post of 2nd In-Commandant (2IC) in Border Security Force and is getting handsome salary. Due to neglect of opposite party no.2 the revisionist is living separate from him and suffering from cancer. The revisionist filed an application u/s 125 Cr.P.C. which was decided by the learned trial court vide order dated 22.02.2024 by which amount of Rs.20,000/- was fixed as amount of maintenance from the date of application i.e. 12.09.2013. Further submitted that in a petition for divorce no.533 of 2014 Rs.15,000/per month were awarded and that amount was increased by this Court to the extent of Rs.45,000/- per month keeping in view the treatment and other medical expenses. He further submits that the gross salary of the opposite party no.2 was Rs.2,02,994/- per month and net salary was Rs.1,43,858/- per month as per the pay slip for the month of September, 2022. Learned trial court has awarded Rs.20,000/- as the amount of maintenance from the date of application in the present case which is less, therefore, request to increase the amount of maintenance.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that the revisionist has already been granted Rs.45,000/- per month as maintenance and for treatment expenses and now the learned

¶10

trial court has again granted Rs.20,000/- per month as maintenance. In this way, the amount cannot be said to be less than the proportionate to the income of the opposite party no.2. So far as recovery of the amount of maintenance is concerned, the revisionist has legal remedy available under the law which she can avail before the appropriate forum.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record and the order passed by the learned trial court, it appears that in a petition for divorce the learned trial court has awarded the amount of maintenance Rs.15,000/- per month which was increased by this Court to the extent of Rs.45,000/keeping in view her maintenance and expenses on treatment of cancer and other expenses. The gross salary of opposite party no.2 was Rs.2,02,994/-. Again the learned trial court has granted Rs.20,000/- per month as maintenance amount in favour of the revisionist. As per observations made by the Apex Court in the case of Kulbhushan Kumar Vs. Raj Kumari (1970) 3 SCC 129, the amount of maintenance may extend to 25% of the net salary of the husband. Taking into account the amount of maintenance and the income of the revisionist this court granted in favour of wife, under Section 24 Hindu Marriage Act, Rs.45,000/- and in the present case Rs.20,000/- though subject to the adjustment in the amount of maintenance being received by the wife by an order of any other court, which cannot be said to be less than the aforesaid limit. In this way, there appears no any illegality or impropriety in the order fixing the amount of maintenance in favour of the revisionist but this revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed.

¶12

So far as the realization of amount is concerned, the revisionist is at liberty to move an application before the learned trial court for realization of amount of maintenance while adopting proper recourse.

¶13

Accordingly, this criminal revision is dismissed.

¶14

Order Date :- 28.4.2025 Ashok Gupta

¶15

Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt Shubhra Garg v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Shubhra Garg v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases