Court No. - 81
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4902 of 2019 Revisionist :- Hari Krishan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Ors. Counsel for Revisionist :- Shibli Naseem Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist Shri Shibli Naseem and in opposition, Shri Attrey Dutt Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This criminal revision has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 26.08.2019 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Gautam Budh Nagar in Suit No. 48 of 2017 (UPGB- 02000264/2017) (Smt. Seema and others v. Hari Krishan), under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., Police Station - Bisrakh, District - Gautam Budh Nagar, whereby the revisionist has been directed to pay an amount of Rs. 6,000/- per month to his wife/opposite party no. 2 and Rs. 3,000/- per month (Rs. 1,500/- each) to both the children/opposite party nos. 3 and 4.
It is argued by learned counsel for the revisionist that by way of instant criminal revision, the revisionist has challenged the order dated 26.08.2019 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Gautam Buddh Nagar, in Case No. 48 of 2017 (UPGB- 02000264 of 2017) (Smt. Seema and others), under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., Police Station - Bisrakh, District - Gautam Budh Nagar, pending in the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Gautam Budh Nagar, whereby the opposite party no. 2, wife of the applicant, has been awarded Rs. 3,000/- per month and opposite party nos. 3 and 4, who are children of the applicant, have been awarded Rs. 1,500/- each per month, to be paid as maintenance from the date of application by the seventh day of every month. Therefore, it is argued by him since the said amount has been awarded from the date of application, a huge amount would accumulate by way of arrear from the date of application i.e. 22.02.2017, which amount was not possible to be paid by him in lump sum. Therefore, he has prayed that the said amount of arrear should be allowed to be paid in installments.
I do not see any infirmity in the impugned order and the same is admitted to the learned counsel for the revisionist as well.
In view of above, the impugned order dated 26.08.2019 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Gautam Buddh Nagar, is hereby upheld.
However, it is provided that in case the applicant moves an application before the court below in order to be permitted to pay the amount of arrear in easy installments, the same may be considered by the court below sympathetically, in its discretion.
With the aforesaid observations/directions, the instant revision stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 17.12.2019 I. Batabyal