High Court dismissed a criminal revision against a Family Court order directing the petitioner to pay monthly maintenance and litigation costs, finding no merit in the plea of financial inability to pay.
Revision application dismissed; direction for issuance of processes under Form 18 and 19 of Cr.P.C., 1973.
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 JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL REVISION No.570 of 2017
Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-1111 Thana- District-
======================================================
Abhay Kumar S/o Suresh Prasad Kushwaha, R/o Village- Mosandi, P.S.Motipur, District- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar @ S.K., Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Smt. Anita Kumari Singh, APP ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER
A.P.P. for the State.
The present Cr. Revision Application has been filed against the order dated 15.03.2017, passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, East Champaran at Motihari in Maintenance Case No. 172/2012 in which petitioner was directed to pay Rs.4,000/- per month as a maintenance with effect from the date of filing of the case i.e. 04.06.2012 as well as to pay lump sum amount of Rs.5,000/- to the O.P. No.2 as the cost of litigation.
Counsel for petitioner submits that the present Cr. Revision has been filed due to the reason that petitioner is not in
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.570 of 2017(3) dt.03-04-2023 2/3
a position to pay Rs.4,000/- per month to the O.P. as it is beyond his financial capacity. Learned counsel for the petitioner is not raising any question of legality, propriety and correctness in the said order/ judgment.
Learned counsel for the State submits that since 04.06.2012 to till date, the total arrears of maintenance become Rs.5,20,000/-. On putting question from the counsel for petitioner that how much he is ready to pay. Counsel submits that he has not in a position to pay even Rs.4,000/- per month then, where is the question of paying Rs.5,20,000/-.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the instructions of his client, the O.P. No.2 entered into marriage with another person.
The question of marriage of O.P. No.2 is not for legal test before this court. The only question of legality, propriety and correctness of order dated 15.03.2017 passed in Maintenance Case No. 172/2012 by which Rs.4,000/- per month has been ordered to pay with effect from 04.06.2012 and Rs.5,000/- as a lump sum litigation cost is in question.
This court finds no merit in this Cr. Revision. Therefore, this Cr. Revision Application is hereby dismissed. The Trial Court/ Principal Judge, Family Court, East Champaran
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.570 of 2017(3) dt.03-04-2023 3/3
is directed to do the needful and make all efforts by issuing processes under Form 18 and 19 of Schedule II of Cr.P.C., 1973 for realization of the amount for the petitioner.
With this observation, this Cr. Revision Application is
hereby dismissed.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.)
prakashmani/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Cr. Revision can be allowed on the ground that the petitioner is not in a position to pay the ordered maintenance amount.
Whether the High Court is required to review the legality, propriety and correctness of the maintenance order when the petitioner only raises financial inability.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Abhay Kumar S/o Suresh Prasad Kushwaha
State Of Bihar
Rina Devi
Dr. Anshuman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
