In this criminal revision, the petitioner challenged the Family Court's order awarding Rs.1500/month maintenance. The High Court found no error in the trial court's approach and dismissed the revision.
The criminal revision petition Cr. Rev. No. 69 of 2015 was dismissed; the original order of maintenance stands.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Rev. No. 69 of 2015
Sabita Devi W/o Arjun Paswan, resident of Malanpur, PO&PSChhatarpur, District-Palamau at present residing at villageNawgarha PO&PS-Bishrampur, District-Palamau
.... ...... Petitioner
Versus
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR
--For the Petitioner : Mr. Ajit Kumar Dubey, Adv. For the State : Mr. P.K. Jaiswal, APP ---
The petitioner is aggrieved of the order dated 15.09.2014 passed in M.P. Case No.40 of 2013 by which he has been directed to pay Rs.1500/- per month as maintenance to his wife.
03/ 11.10.2019
2
of the learned Family Court Judge. Therefore, keeping in mind the limitations under the revisional jurisdiction, I am not inclined to interfere with the order dated 15.09.2014 and, accordingly, Cr. Rev. No.69 of 2015 is dismissed.
(Shree Chandrashekhar, J.)
R.K.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Family Court's quantum of maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was erroneous?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sabita Devi
Arjun Paswan
The State of Jharkhand
Shree Chandrashekhar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
