Gujarat High Court
Mukeshbhai Jethabhai Udani vs State Of Gujarat & on 6 November, 2015
Author: J.B.Pardiwala
Bench: J.B.Pardiwala
R/SCR.A/3070/2013 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 3070 of 2013
==========================================================
MUKESHBHAI JETHABHAI UDANI....Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1....Respondent(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR P P MAJMUDAR, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
HCLS COMMITTEE, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR PH BUCH, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS HB PUNANI, ADD. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
Date : 06/11/2015
ORAL ORDER
1. By this application under Article227 of the Constitution of India, the petitionerhusband calls in question the legality and validity of the order dated 05.09.2013 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Jam Khambhalia in the Criminal Revision Application No.59 of 2013, by which the learned Sessions Judge rejected the revision application filed by the husband thereby affirming the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Khambhalia in the Criminal Misc. Application No.121 of 2008.
2. It appears from the materials on record that the respondent no.2 herein preferred an application under Section125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for maintenance. The learned Judicial Magistrate passed an order awarding Rs.600/ per month towards the maintenance of the wife and minor daughter. Thereafter, the wife Page 1 of 2 HC-NIC Page 1 of 2 Created On Sun Nov 08 02:50:42 IST 2015 R/SCR.A/3070/2013 ORDER preferred an application being Criminal Misc. Application No.121 of 2008 under Section127 of the Code for enhancement of the amount of the maintenance. The said application was ordered to be partly allowed by which the amount of maintenance was enhanced to Rs.6,000/ per month.
3. The husband being dissatisfied with the order of enhancement passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Khambhalia preferred a criminal revision application before the Sessions Court, which was ordered to be rejected. Being dissatisfied, the husband has come with this application.
4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and having considered the materials on record, I am of the view that no error, not to speak of any error of law could be said to have been committed by the Court below in passing the impugned order. This application is devoid of merit, the same is accordingly rejected.
5. I am told that as on today, the husband is in arrears of maintenance to the tune of more than Rs.2,50,000/. It will be open for the wife to prefer an appropriate application before the court concerned for recovery of the said amount and further appropriate orders. If such application is filed, the same shall be considered at the earliest and shall be disposed of in accordance with law. Notice is discharged. Adinterim relief granted earlier shall stand vacated forthwith.
(J.B.PARDIWALA, J.) aruna Page 2 of 2 HC-NIC Page 2 of 2 Created On Sun Nov 08 02:50:42 IST 2015