Smt Gulfsha and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:117746

Court No. - 84

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2941 of 2025

Revisionist :- Smt Gulfsha And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Ashok Kumar Singh Bais Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the revisionists as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present criminal revision has been filed with a prayer to allow the revision and set aside the judgment and order dated 19.03.2025 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Sambhal in Case No. 369 of 2023 (Gulfsha and others Vs. Wasaruddin) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Bahjoi, District Sambhal.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionists that in this case, the opposite party no. 2 is husband of the revisionist no. 1 and revisionist nos. 2 and 3 are minor daughter and son of the opposite party no. 2. Revisionist no. 1 filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. against the opposite party no. 2 for maintenance of herself and two minor children but learned trial court rejected her claim on the ground of adultery and accepted the claim of two minor children granting the amount of maintenance Rs. 3000/- per month for each child that is less than sufficient. She is living separate from the husband due to his neglect with minor children, therefore, request to allow the revision and also grant the maintenance in favour of wife and increase the amount of maintenance in favour of revisionist nos. 2 and 3.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that there was no any physical relation between the husband and wife for a period of two years after she started living separate from him even though she gave birth to 3rd child for which she is not claiming the amount of maintenance which shows that she is living in adultery that is the reason learned trial court has rejected her claim.

¶10

On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionists as well as

¶11

learned A.G.A. perusal of record and order passed by learned trial court it appears that the revisionist no. 1 is living separate from opposite party no. 2/husband from 19.4.2022 in her maika and did not go to her sasural and on 4.11.2023 she gave birth to a child namely Shefkhan in her maika. This fact was admitted by her during her cross-examination before the learned trial court. The opposite party no. 2 has also stated before the learned trial court that there was dispute between both of them for two years. This fact was taken into consideration by the learned trial court while passing the order and it was found that she had been living separate from her husband since 19.4.2022 and gave birth to a child on 4.11.2023. There was time gap of one year and seven months, therefore, the birth of 3rd child from wedlock cannot be said to be possible but it can be inferred that she came in relation to some other person and ultimately gave birth to 3rd child. She does not claim the maintenance in favour of 3rd child Shefkhan, it establishes the fact that she was living in adultery, therefore, not entitled for maintenance from the husband in view of provision as provided under Section 125(4) Cr.P.C. The learned trial court has considered this fact and passed the order in question and rejected the claim of wife for maintenance. The amount of maintenance Rs. 3000/- for each children has been fixed by the learned trial court that cannot be said to be less than sufficient since he has disclosed himself to be a labour and has no any regular income. In this way, there appears no any illegality or impropriety in passing the order dated 19.03.2025 but this revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed at the admission stage.

¶12

Accordingly, the present revision is dismissed .

¶13

Order Date :- 21.7.2025 Anurag Singh

¶14

Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt Gulfsha and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Gulfsha and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhupendra Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

Pushp Kumar Dixit vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rashid vs State of U.P. and Another

Arvind Kumar vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ankit Katiyar vs State of U.P. and Another

Ravi Kant vs State of U.P. and Another