Back
R.K.RASTOGI
SARVESH KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent
What is the scope of alteration under Section 127, Cr.P.C. and who may move such an application? What are the grounds for cancellation or variation of maintenance orders under Section 127, Cr.P.C. in light of changed circumstances? Can an application under Section 127, Cr.P.C. be filed by a party who was not the original applicant under Section 125, Cr.P.C.?
Key Points: - The judgment interprets Section 127, Cr.P.C., allowing alteration of maintenance on proof of changed circumstances. (!) (!) - It holds that the application under Section 127 can be moved by either party seeking benefit of changed circumstances, and not exclusively by the original applicant under Section 125. [p_1: 25000195000006] - The order rejecting a Section 127 application on the basis that only the original applicant can file is erroneous; the matter is remanded for fresh disposal on merits after hearing both parties. [p_1: 25000195000007][p_4: 25000195000008]
Hon’ble R.K. Rastogi, J.—This is an application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the order dated 17.05.2007 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Moradabad in Misc. Case No. 82 of 2007 Sarvesh Kumar v. Smt. Kamini Singh, under Section 127, Cr.P.C.
2. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and the AGA for the State.
3. Since the point involved in this application is a legal point regarding interpretation of Section 127, Cr.P.C. I am deciding this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. at the admission stage on merit.
4. The facts relevant for disposal of this application are that opposite parties No. 2 and 3 had filed an application under Section 125, Cr.P.C. against the present applicant in the Court of Principal Judge Family Court, Moradabad, which was registered as Case No. 74/11 of 2003. This case was contested by the present applicant and the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, after hearing both the parties awarded Rs. 2,000/- (two thousand) per month to Opposite Party No. 2 and Rs. 1,000/- (one thousand) per month to Opposite Party No. 3 as maintenance vide his judgment dated 7.12.2006. Thereafter the present applicant filed an application under Secti
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
