A husband challenged a Family Court order granting maintenance of Rs.5,000 per month to his wife and Rs.3,000 to his physically challenged son under Section 125 Cr.P.C. The High Court found the amount petty and the order just, citing Supreme Court precedent on social justice, and dismissed the revision petition.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 464/2020
Rajendra Kumar S/o Shri Bhanwarlal, Aged About 60 Years, R/o College Road, Near Bhardhwaj’s House, In Front Of Tower, Baran, Thana Kotwali, Baran, District Baran (Raj.).
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singhal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Imran Khan, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Order
14/05/2024
(2 of 3) [CRLR-464/2020]
petitioner. Hence under these circumstances the order passed by the Family court is not sustainable in the eye of law and is liable to be quashed and set aside.
[CRLR-464/2020]
(3 of 3)
respondents. The order passed by the Family Court is just and proper, which requires no interference by this Court.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J
DIKSHA MISHRA /26
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Family Court's order granting maintenance of Rs.5,000 to the wife and Rs.3,000 to the son under Section 125 Cr.P.C. required interference in revision.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dwarika Prasad Satpathy Vs. Bidyut Prava Dixit And AnotherRelied on¶4
AIR 1999 SC 3348 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rajendra Kumar
Gita Bai
Dharmendra
Anoop Kumar Dhand
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
