Court No. - 48
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2342 of 2018 Revisionist :- Ikramuddin And 3 Ors.
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr.
Counsel for Revisionist :- Satya Prakash Singh,Satyendra Narayan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karuna Nand Bajpayee,J.
This revision has been preferred on behalf of revisionists against the judgment and order dated 03.01.2017 passed by the Judicial Magistrate-I, Hapur in Case No.6333 of 2015 (Smt. Imrana vs. Ikramuddin and others) u/s 17, 18, 19, 20, 22 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005, whereby the learned Magistrate has directed the revisionist no.1 to pay Rs.1500/- to each of the children of opposite party no.2 and further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- on time u/s 12 of the Domestic Violence Act and judgment dated 16.05.2018 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court -I, Hapur in Appeal No.02 of 2017 (Ikramuddin and others vs. Smt. Imrana) whereby the appeal of the revisionist has been partly allowed and order pased by the Judicial Magistrate-I, Hapur was modified up to the extent to pay Rs.500/- to each of the children of opposite party no.2.
Heard learned counsel for revisionists and learned A.G.A. and also perused the record.
Counsel for the revisionist has not been able to point out any illegality much less than any abuse of court's process in the impugned orders which may persuade this Court to interfere in the same. The impugned orders reflect judicial application of mind. Rs.500/- only has been fixed to be paid per month which by itself is a very very meagre paltry amount. In fact the appellate court's order is too liberal by way of which the lower court's order has been modified. In the present days of high price rise fixing up Rs.500/- to be paid only is something which no reasonable man can ever object to. There is absolutely nothing to interfere with the impugned orders.
The revision lacks merit and same stands dismissed.
Order Date :- 26.7.2018 M. Kumar