Allahabad High Court
Pramod Singh @ Pramod Kumar vs State Of U.P. & Another on 25 November, 2019
Author: Rajeev Singh
Bench: Rajeev Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1417 of 2019 Revisionist :- Pramod Singh @ Pramod Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. & Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Alok Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
This criminal revision has been filed for quashing the judgment and order dated 22.07.2019 passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge (FTC) Court No.37, Barabanki, in Misc. Case No.93 of 2011, under Section 127 Cr.P.C. (Smt. Suman Lata Vs. Pramod Singh).
In pursuance of the order dated 24.10.2019, notice was issued to the opposite party No.2, it is evident from the record that the notice was personally served to the opposite party No.2 but neither she entered before this Court, nor put in appearance through her counsel.
Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that initially vide order dated 16.04.1999, the maintenance was awarded to the opposite party No.2 a sum of Rs.400/- per month, as she moved to another application under Section 127 Cr.P.C. for enhancement of maintenance which was allowed by Additional District & Sessions Judge (FTC) Court No.37, Barabank vide order dated 22.07.2019 and directed the revisionist to pay Rs.3000/- per month from the date of judgment.
Learned counsel for the revisionist further submitted that the brother of the opposite party No.2 are capable to maintain her and she admitted in her statement before the court below.
Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer of revisionist and submitted that a consent was given by the opposite party No.2 to the revisionist to solemnize second marriage, as a result, revisionist entered into the second marriage and having two wife, as the opposite party No.2 is the legally wedded wife, therefore, she is entitled to get maintenance and there is no illegality in the order passed by court below.
Considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and going through the record, it is evident that the marriage of the opposite party No.2 was solemnized with the applicant in the year 1994 and thereafter, she was ousted by the revisionist, then she filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. which was registered as Misc. Case No.465 of 1998, (Smt. Suman Lata Vs. Pramod Singh) in the court below and the aforesaid case was decided vide judgment and order dated 16.04.1999 in which the maintenance of Rs.400/- was awarded to the opposite party No.2 for monthly basis. As the revisionist entered into the second marriage and at this stage, as per the price index, opposite party No.2 moved an application for enhancement of the maintenance and her application was allowed after giving opportunity to the revisionist and court below has observed that revisionist clearly deposed before the court below that he does not want to live with the opposite party No.2, as he is living with second wife.
In such circumstance, there is no illegality in the order passed by the court below, accordingly, the revision is dismissed.
Order Date :- 25.11.2019 Amit/-