High Court · 2025

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. The present criminal revision has been moved with prayer to allow the revision and set aside the judgment and order dated 26.09.2024 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Ghazipur in Criminal Misc. Case No.542 of 2020 (CNR No. UPGH020020932020) (Smt. Rajwati Devi vs. Rajendra Singh Kushwaha) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Ghazipur, whereby learned Principal Judge, Family Court has directed the revisionist to pay @ Rs.5000/- per month to opposite party no.2 for her maintenance, medical expenses and her minor son for medical and education and other expenses jointly from date of the application dated 25.10.2011 to date of order dated 26.09.2024 and also directed to pay the opposite party no.2 all the arrears of the maintenance in equal three installments within three months and also directed the revisionist to pay the opposite party no.2 Rs.6000/- per month as a maintenance from the date of order dated 26.09.2024 by 10th of each month. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the opposite party no.2 is his wedded wife who started living separate from him from the year 2011 without any sufficient reason with a minor child. He further submits that the wife/opposite party no.2 was working as mid-wife and operating Jachcha Bachcha Kendra and was able to maintain herself even though the learned trial court has fixed the amount of maintenance Rs.5000/- per month in favour of wife from the date of application to the date of order and Rs.6000/- per month from the date of order. He also submits that the revisionist took voluntary retirement in the year 2011 and now he has no any work to do and no any source of income except pension. The allegation made by the wife about illicit relations with some other lady is totally false. No any demand of dowry or harassment was made by him. He also submits that he filed petition u/s 13 Hindu Marriage Act in which application u/s 24 was filed by the wife for maintenance but it was rejected on the ground that she was able to maintain herself by operating Jachcha Bachcha Kendra against which an appeal was filed before this Court which was also dismissed on the same ground. This shows that she is operating Jachcha Bachcha Kendra and making income and is able to maintain herself, therefore, she cannot be said to be entitled for interim maintenance but learned trial court without considering all these facts allowed the application fixing the amount as aforesaid which is illegal and erroneous, therefore, request to set aside and allow the revision. He also submits that the amount has been allowed from the year 2011 and the amount of arrears is too much, therefore, it be divided into installments for easy payment. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record and the order dated 26.09.2024, it appears that admittedly opposite party no.2 is wedded wife of the revisionist who was working in Army. There was a minor child with the wedlock who was living with the opposite party in her maika. She started living apart from him due to his neglect and harassment. The opposite party is an educated lady and is M.A. degree holder. There is nothing on record to show that she was operating Jachcha Bachcha Kendra or she had a diploma of nursing. In this regard, the revisionist has filed some photographs of sign Board showing the name of opposite party as proprietor of Jachcha Bachcha Kendra and also some slips regarding prescriptions of medicines but those papers have not been proved either by the revisionist or by any other person before the learned trial court. A complaint was also made to the C.M.O. by the revisionist regarding operation of Jachcha Bachcha Kendra on the basis of which enquiry was made by the C.M.O. but no such Jachcha Bachcha Kendra was found to be operated by opposite party. In this way, without any material in support of allegations of the revisionist that opposite party was operating Jachcha Bachcha Kendra, cannot be said to be established and proved. There is no any material on record to show that she was making any income to maintain herself and her minor child. Now the child has become major and is working somewhere in private sector. The revisionist has not given any amount to the opposite party as maintenance or for the maintenance of minor child or for the expenses on his education but somehow those expenses were born by the opposite party. Prior to the retirement of revisionist some amount was being deducted from his salary for maintenance of wife but it was also stopped at the instance of the revisionist that she was operating Jachcha Bachcha Kendra and making income. In this way, the opposite party no.2 has brought up the minor child somehow but the revisionist has not paid any amount in this regard to her. Learned trial court has considered all these facts while passing the order dated 26.09.2024 and then fixed the amount of maintenance Rs.5000/- per month in favour of wife from the date of application to the date of order including the expenses on education of minor child, thereafter, from the date of order the amount of Rs.6000/- per month fixed as maintenance to the opposite party/wife. In considered opinion of this Court, there appears no any illegality in the order, therefore, it does not warrant any interference by this Court. So far as the amount of arrears of maintenance is concerned, the revisionist is directed to make payment of amount of arrears of maintenance in 10 equal installments alongwith the current amount of maintenance. In case, he fails to make payment as aforesaid, the learned trial court will be at liberty to proceed for realization of amount in accordance with law. Accordingly, this criminal revision is disposed of. Order Date :- 9.7.2025 Ashok Gupta ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. The present criminal revision has been moved with prayer to allow the revision and set aside the judgment and order dated 26.09.2024 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Ghazipur in Criminal Misc. Case No.542 of 2020 (CNR No. UPGH020020932020) (Smt. Rajwati Devi vs. Rajendra Singh Kushwaha) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Ghazipur, whereby learned Principal Judge, Family Court has directed the revisionist to pay @ Rs.5000/- per month to opposite party no.2 for her maintenance, medical expenses and her minor son for medical and education and other expenses jointly from date of the application dated 25.10.2011 to date of order dated 26.09.2024 and also directed to pay the opposite party no.2 all the arrears of the maintenance in equal three installments within three months and also directed the revisionist to pay the opposite party no.2 Rs.6000/- per month as a maintenance from the date of order dated 26.09.2024 by 10th of each month. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the opposite party no.2 is his wedded wife who started living separate from him from the year 2011 without any sufficient reason with a minor child. He further submits that the wife/opposite party no.2 was working as mid-wife and operating Jachcha Bachcha Kendra and was able to maintain herself even though the learned trial court has fixed the amount of maintenance Rs.5000/- per month in favour of wife from the date of application to the date of order and Rs.6000/- per month from the date of order. He also submits that the revisionist took voluntary retirement in the year 2011 and now he has no any work to do and no any source of income except pension. The allegation made by the wife about illicit relations with some other lady is totally false. No any demand of dowry or harassment was made by him. He also submits that he filed petition u/s 13 Hindu Marriage Act in which application u/s 24 was filed by the wife for maintenance but it was rejected on the ground that she was able to maintain herself by operating Jachcha Bachcha Kendra against which an appeal was filed before this Court which was also dismissed on the same ground. This shows that she is operating Jachcha Bachcha Kendra and making income and is able to maintain herself, therefore, she cannot be said to be entitled for interim maintenance but learned trial court without considering all these facts allowed the application fixing the amount as aforesaid which is illegal and erroneous, therefore, request to set aside and allow the revision. He also submits that the amount has been allowed from the year 2011 and the amount of arrears is too much, therefore, it be divided into installments for easy payment. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record and the order dated 26.09.2024, it appears that admittedly opposite party no.2 is wedded wife of the revisionist who was working in Army. There was a minor child with the wedlock who was living with the opposite party in her maika. She started living apart from him due to his neglect and harassment. The opposite party is an educated lady and is M.A. degree holder. There is nothing on record to show that she was operating Jachcha Bachcha Kendra or she had a diploma of nursing. In this regard, the revisionist has filed some photographs of sign Board showing the name of opposite party as proprietor of Jachcha Bachcha Kendra and also some slips regarding prescriptions of medicines but those papers have not been proved either by the revisionist or by any other person before the learned trial court. A complaint was also made to the C.M.O. by the revisionist regarding operation of Jachcha Bachcha Kendra on the basis of which enquiry was made by the C.M.O. but no such Jachcha Bachcha Kendra was found to be operated by opposite party. In this way, without any material in support of allegations of the revisionist that opposite party was operating Jachcha Bachcha Kendra, cannot be said to be established and proved. There is no any material on record to show that she was making any income to maintain herself and her minor child. Now the child has become major and is working somewhere in private sector. The revisionist has not given any amount to the opposite party as maintenance or for the maintenance of minor child or for the expenses on his education but somehow those expenses were born by the opposite party. Prior to the retirement of revisionist some amount was being deducted from his salary for maintenance of wife but it was also stopped at the instance of the revisionist that she was operating Jachcha Bachcha Kendra and making income. In this way, the opposite party no.2 has brought up the minor child somehow but the revisionist has not paid any amount in this regard to her. Learned trial court has considered all these facts while passing the order dated 26.09.2024 and then fixed the amount of maintenance Rs.5000/- per month in favour of wife from the date of application to the date of order including the expenses on education of minor child, thereafter, from the date of order the amount of Rs.6000/- per month fixed as maintenance to the opposite party/wife. In considered opinion of this Court, there appears no any illegality in the order, therefore, it does not warrant any interference by this Court. So far as the amount of arrears of maintenance is concerned, the revisionist is directed to make payment of amount of arrears of maintenance in 10 equal installments alongwith the current amount of maintenance. In case, he fails to make payment as aforesaid, the learned trial court will be at liberty to proceed for realization of amount in accordance with law. Accordingly, this criminal revision is disposed of. Order Date :- 9.7.2025 Ashok Gupta ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad