Dismissed

Murari Lal v. State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Rajasthan HC14 Dec 2017CRLMP/275/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged interim maintenance of Rs. 3000/month awarded to his wife by lower courts under Section 125 Cr.P.C. via Section 482 Cr.P.C. Bench found no patent illegality, noting inflation makes the amount appropriate, and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

Order maintaining interim maintenance of Rs. 3000/month set aside; stay application dismissed as not surviving.

Murari Lal Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr. — Maintenance and Alimony | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 277 / 2017

¶3

Sanjay Kumar Mahala S/o Shri Jagdish Adopted S/o Bhagwan Sahai, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Dhani Laduwali, Tan Village Dadiya Rampura, P.S. Reengus, Tehsil Srimadhopur, Distt. Sikar

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Rajasthan Through PP

¶7

Priyanka Devi W/o Sanjay Kumar D/o Prabhati Lal B/c Jat, R/o Dhani Laduwali, Tan Village Dadiya Rampura, P.S. Reengus, Tehsil Srimadhopur, At Present R/o Govindpura, Tehsil Khandela, Distt. Sikar

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Mahla

¶10

For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakad, Public Prosecutor

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA / Order

¶12

14/12/2017

¶13

Instant petition has been preferred under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying therein that the order dated 30.05.2016 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Srimadhopur District Sikar, whereby application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. filed by the respondent No.2 has been partly allowed, along with the order dated 07.12.2016 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Srimadhopur, District Sikar, whereby revision petition filed by the petitioner has been dismissed, be set aside.

¶14

The Court of Judicial Magistrate, Srimadhopur awarded Rs.3000/- per month as interim maintenance in favour of the respondent No.2 – aggrieved-wife.

¶15

Aggrieved against the same, the petitioner had filed a revision petition. The Revisional Court confirmed the quantum of maintenance awarded by the Lower Court.

¶16

(2 of 2)

¶17

[CRLMP-277/2017]

¶18

In the present petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., no patent illegality or infirmity has been pointed out to disturb the well reasoned orders passed by the two Courts below.

¶19

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the amount of Rs.3000/- per month is on the higher side.

¶20

Considering the inflation and cost of day-to-day living, this Court is of the view that no interference is warranted.

¶21

Consequently, the present petition, being devoid of merits is

¶22

dismissed.

¶23

Consequent upon dismissal of the main petition, the stay application, filed therewith does not survive and the same is also dismissed.

¶24

(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA)J.

¶25

ashok

Murari Lal v. State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Murari Lal v. State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dinesh Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Dinesh Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Karanjeet Singh Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Maphal Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Kishore Kumar Kushlani Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

State of Rajasthan Vs Manohar Singh and Ors.