Dismissed¶14

Kapil v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Jun 2025CRLR/7476/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 125 Cr.P.C. interim maintenance Rs. 2000/- per month; Family Court Shahjahanpur order dated 15.01.2025 (Maintenance Case No. 829 of 2023, Smt. Reeta v. Kapil) upheld; criminal revision dismissed as devoid of merit; award based on prima facie opinion pending final adjudication after oral and documentary evidence; Madan Pal Singh, J.; CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 7476 of 2025.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity and calls for no interference by this Court. ¶13

Kapil vs State of U.P. and Another — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 7476 of 2025

Kapil

.....Revisionist(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another

¶6

.....Opposite Party(s)

¶7

Counsel for Revisionist(s)	: Sunil Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶8

Court No. - 85

¶9

HON'BLE MADAN PAL SINGH, J.

¶10

Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the revisionist and learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶11

This criminal revision has been filed by the revisionist with prayer to set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 15.01.2025 passed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Shahjahanpur in Maintenance Case No. 829 of 2023 (Smt. Reeta Vs. Kapil), under Section 125 Cr.P.C.,whereby the revisionist has been directed to pay Rs. 2000/- per month to the opposite party no. 2 as interim maintenance from the date of the application.

¶12

From the impugned order, it transpires that the interim maintenance allowance to the tune of Rs. 2000/- per month has been awarded by the trial court only on the basis of prima facie opinion by considering the income of the revisionist. The application filed by the opposite party no. 2 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. is pending consideration before the court below for final adjudication and the same shall be decided after oral as well as documentary evidence have to be led. During the course of trial the parties will have ample opportunity to file their respective evidence before the trial court on the basis of that, trial court shall reach at the conclusion as to what exact amount to be awarded as maintenance.

¶13

Keeping in view of the facts of the present case and in the considered opinion of this Court the impugned order does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity and calls for no interference by this Court.

¶14

The criminal revision is devoid of merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶15

March 20, 2026 Akbar

¶16

(Madan Pal Singh,J.)

¶17

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AKBAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kapil v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kapil 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Lalmani Alias Lalman vs State of U.P. and Another

Kiran Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

Ankit vs State of U.P. and Another

Govind Soni vs State of U.P. and Another

Masaruf Ali vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Saurabh @ Saurabh Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another