Dismissed¶9

Deepak Kumar Singh v. Smt.Jyoti Singh

Uttarakhand HC7 Mar 2025CRLR/217/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal revision CRLR 217/2013 by husband against Family Court, Pauri Garhwal maintenance order (Misc. Crl. Case 22/2012, dated 20.06.2023); maintenance u/s 125 Cr.P.C. of Rs.2,700 per month from 16.03.2012 affirmed; revisional powers u/s 397/401 Cr.P.C. limited to material illegality; concurrent findings of fact on evidence not disturbed; revision dismissed, impugned judgment affirmed; trial Court to proceed, stay vacated; single judge Pankaj Purohit, J.; decided 07.03.2025; advocates S.K. Mandal (revisionist) and Raman K. Shah (respondent); parties Jyoti Singh v Deepak Kr. Singh.

What did the court decide?

Revision dismissed; impugned judgment affirmed; trial Court directed to proceed with the matter in accordance with law (stay order already vacated). ¶9

SL. No.

Date

Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with

COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS

Signatures

CRLR No.217 of 2013
Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
Mr.
S.K.
Mandal,
learned
counsel
for
the
revisionist.

2.
Mr. Raman K. Shah, learned counsel for the
respondent.
3.
Revisionist has challenged the judgment and order
dated 20.06.2023 passed by the Judge, Family Court,
Pauri Garhwal in Misc. Crl. Case No.22 of 2012, Jyoti
Singh_v_Deepak Kr. Singh whereby the revisionist was
directed to pay a sum of Rs.2,700 per month as
maintenance the respondent u/s 125 Cr.P.C.
4.
Facts in nutshell are that in this matter, both the
parties were married to each other. However, on
account of certain scores between them, the wife was
compelled to stay at her maternal house. Seeking
maintenance, she moved an application u/s 125 Cr.P.C.
before the court below @Rs.20,000/- per month. The
revisionist filed his written statement and prayed that
the application be dismissed. The Court below directed
the revisionist-husband to pay maintenance @Rs.2700/-
per month from the date of institution of application i.e.
16.03.2012. Hence this revision by the husband.
5.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and
gone through the papers on file.
6.
It is not in dispute that the parties are married to
each other. The revisionist is having a printing press
besides having 3.5 acres of agricultural land. On the
other hand, respondent-wife is an uneducated lady
having no source of income. It is the duty enjoined upon
a husband to maintain his wife. Admittedly, the
revisionist had already re-married after taking divorce

from the respon	dent	-wife.
7. Having go illegality in the	ne t imp	hrough the entire facts, I find no ugned order. The findings given by
the Court below evidence led bef the same.	are ore i	the findings of facts on the basis of t. I find no ground to disagree with
8. Moreover r limited only to	evis the	ional powers u/s 397/401 are very extent of examining any material
illegality. Howe matter.	ver,	no such illegality is found in this
9. For the afo same is dismiss affirmed.	resa ed.	id reasons, the revision fails and the The impugned judgment is hereby
10. Since the this matter, the the matter in ac R.Dang	stay tria cord	order has already been vacated in l Court is directed to proceed with ance with law. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 07.03.2025

from the respon

dent

-wife.

7.
Having go
illegality in the

ne t
imp

hrough the entire facts, I find no
ugned order. The findings given by

the Court below
evidence led bef
the same.

are
ore i

the findings of facts on the basis of
t. I find no ground to disagree with

8.
Moreover r
limited only to

evis
the

ional powers u/s 397/401 are very
extent of examining any material

illegality. Howe
matter.

ver,

no such illegality is found in this

9.
For the afo
same is dismiss
affirmed.

resa
ed.

id reasons, the revision fails and the
The impugned judgment is hereby

10. Since the
this matter, the
the matter in ac
R.Dang

stay
tria
cord

order has already been vacated in
l Court is directed to proceed with
ance with law.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
07.03.2025

Deepak Kumar Singh v. Smt.Jyoti Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak Kumar Singh v. Smt.Jyoti Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anil Rastogi Vs State of Uttarakhand

Sanjay Kumar Vs State of Uttarakhand

Rajendra Kumar Vs State of Uttarakhand

Prem Rathor Vs State of Uttarakhand

Kanhaiya Bisht Vs State of Uttarakhand

Jeewan Chandra Pandey Vs State of Uttarakhand