Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Mohd Bilal vs State & Anr on 13 February, 2017
Author: Vijay Bishnoi
Bench: Vijay Bishnoi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO. 242 / 2017
Mohd. Bilal S/o Shri Iqbal Mohd. Joiya b/c Musalman, aged 46
years, resident of Meena Beauty Parlor, House No.151, Antyoday
Nagar, Bikaner (Raj.).
...........Petitioner
VERSUS
1. The State of Rajasthan
2. Smt. Sayra Bano @ Muniya W/o Shri Mohd. Bilal, D/o Late
Mohd. Ali Zulan, b/c Musalman, Resident of Indra Colony,
Near Nai Masjid, Bikaner (Raj.).
.............Respondents
____________________________________________________
Counsel For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shyam S. Khatri
Counsel For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.S. Panwar, PP
_____________________________________________________
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI
Judgment / Order 13/02/2017 This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the petitioner being aggrieved with the order dated 30.11.2016 passed by the Family Court No.2, Bikaner (hereinafter referred to as the court below) in Criminal Misc. Application No.175/2016 preferred on behalf of the respondent No.2 under Section 127 Cr.P.C., whereby the aforesaid application has been rejected.
Brief facts of the case are that the respondent No.2 has moved an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to give direction to the petitioner to pay maintenance to her and her children. The said proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. were (2 of 3) decided vide order dated 14.2.2003 passed by the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No.2, Bikaner on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties, wherein the petitioner had agreed to pay maintenance to the tune of Rs.2,000/- per month to the respondent No.2. The respondent No.2 moved an application under Section 127 Cr.P.C. with a prayer for enhancing the maintenance amount, however, the court below has observed that since the proceedings initiated by her under Section 125 Cr.P.C. have already been decided on the basis of an agreement, wherein the respondent No.2 had agreed to receive the maintenance to the tune of Rs.2,000/- per month from the petitioner, therefore, no case for enhancing the maintenance amount is made out and therefore the application preferred by the respondent No.2 under Section 127 Cr.P.C. is not liable to be allowed and the same was dismissed by the court below, however at the same time, the court below observed that the respondent No.2 is entitled to receive maintenance to the tune of Rs.2,000/- per month from the petitioner as per the order dated 14.2.2003 passed by the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No.2, Bikaner.
After going through the impugned order, this Court is of the opinion that as a matter of fact the order impugned is not adverse to the petitioner in any manner and the court below has rightly observed that the respondent No.2 is entitled to receive interim maintenance from the petitioner to the tune of Rs.2,000/- per month as per the order dated 14.2.2003 passed by the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No.2, Bikaner.
The petitioner is bound to pay the said amount of (3 of 3) maintenance as per the agreement entered into between him and the respondent No.2. The Family Court No.2, Bikaner shall ensure that the respondent No.2 is receiving the said maintenance amount including the dues from the petitioner.
With these observations, this criminal misc. petition is dismissed. Stay petition also stands dismissed.
A copy of this order be sent to the Family Court No.2, Bikaner forthwith.
(VIJAY BISHNOI), J.
ms rathore/46