Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Jai Prakash vs State Of U P And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|25 June, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2471 of 2019 Revisionist :- Jai Prakash Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Anirudh Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A.
The instant revision is directed against the order dated 16.05.2019 passed by the Principal Judge Family Court, Maharajganj, in Maintenance Suit No. 26 of 2019 (CNR- U.P.M.H.02) (Smt. Deep Mala and another versus Jai Prakash Shukla), under section 125 Cr.P.C., P.S. Kolhuai, District Maharajganj.
Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that the revisionist is paying Rs. 2000/- per month to the second and third respondent (wife/son) under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The court below has awarded Rs. 4000/- maintenance (Rs. 2500/- to the wife and Rs. 1500/- to the son). It is, therefore, urged that the sum of Rs. 2000/- being paid under the Domestic Violence Act be adjusted in the awarded amount in proceedings under section 125 Cr.P.C.
On specific query, learned counsel for the revisionist is unable to show from the material placed on record that the issue was raised and pressed before the court below, further, the court while deciding the issue no. 2 has returned a finding of fact that the revisionist is a well off person having Bolero/Safari and other vehicles which he has engaged in services at Rohtak, Haryana. Further, the revisionist owns trolley, tractor, rice plant and has independent properties; the gross income of the revisionist is approximately Rs. one lac per month.
Learned counsel for the revisionist has not disputed the income of the revisionist, further, it is not in dispute that the second and third respondent are living separately and he is liable to maintain them.
Learned counsel for the revisionist failed to point out any illegality, infirmity or jurisdictional error in the impugned order.
The revision is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 25.6.2019
K.K. Maurya
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Jai Prakash vs State Of U P And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
25 June, 2019
Judges
  • Suneet Kumar
Advocates
  • Anirudh Kumar Upadhyay