Dismissed

Gallu v. Smt Bardi

Rajasthan HC20 Dec 2017CRLR/1011/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the revision petition challenging the allowance of maintenance under Section 125 CrPC. Upholding the Trial Court's order of Rs. 1,500/- per month, the Court held the amount was reasonable and no ground for interference existed despite the petitioner's claim of self-maintenance. The petition was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The petition under Section 397 and 401 CrPC challenging the maintenance order under Section 125 CrPC was dismissed.

Gallu Vs Smt Bardi — Maintenance and Alimony | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Revision No. 1011 / 2016 Gallu Son of Shri Badri, by Caste Kumhar, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Village Chakeri, Police Station Malarna Dungar, District Sawai Madhopur (raj.)

¶3

----Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

Smt. Bardi Wife of Shri Gallu, by Caste Kumhar, R/o Village Chakeri, Police Station Malarna Dungar, District Sawai Madhopur (raj.) At Present R/o Kherda, P.S. Mantown, Sawai Madhopur (raj.)

¶6

----Respondent

¶7

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Vandana Sharma Adv.

¶8

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Judgment

¶9

20/12/2017

¶10

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 397 and 401 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 challenging the order dated 17.06.2016 whereby application moved by the respondent under Section 125 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was allowed.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is aged about 60 years and is unable to pay the maintenance amount to the respondent. Petitioner is capable of maintaining herself.

¶12

Petitioner got married to the respondent about 35 years prior to the filing of the application under Section 125 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Out of the wedlock, parties were blessed with three sons. It is the case of the respondent that she used to be

¶13

(2 of 2)

¶14

[CRLR-1011/2016]

¶15

given beatings by the petitioner under the influence of liquor. Petitioner, on the other hand, denied the allegations levelled against him by the respondent.

¶16

Parties led their evidence in support of their respective pleas. During trial, it transpired that the petitioner is the owner of 2 Bighas of land and earned Rs.3,500/- per month by preparing meals in a school.

¶17

Provision of under Section 125 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been incorporated with a view to provide speedy maintenance to the deserted wives and children.

¶18

In the facts and circumstances of the present case, the amount of maintenance granted by the Trial Court to the tune of Rs.1,500/- per month to the respondent cannot be said to be on a higher side in these days of high prices. No ground for interference by this Court, while while exercising revisional jurisdiction is made out.

¶19

Dismissed.

¶20

(SABINA)J.

¶21

S.Kumawat/D-120

Gallu v. Smt Bardi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gallu v. Smt Bardi

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

State of Rajasthan Vs Rais Khan @ Raja

Rajasthan Motors Deoli Vs Jagdish

Chetan Lal Kumawat Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Ravindra Kumar and Ors. Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Pramila Verma Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Krishna Kumar Mathur and Anr. Vs State of Raj and Ors.