Back
RAJ BEER SINGH
Bitola @ Rinku – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appeal against family court order (Para 2) |
| 2. facts of the case regarding maintenance (Para 3 , 11) |
| 3. opposition's argument on the order's legality (Para 4) |
| 4. social justice aim of maintenance law (Para 6 , 8) |
| 5. supreme court's interpretation on social justice (Para 7) |
| 6. family court's procedural errors identified (Para 9 , 10) |
| 7. conclusion and order for remand (Para 12 , 13) |
JUDGMENT :
Raj Beer Singh, J.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned AGA for the State. None has appeared on behalf of opposite party No.2 despite service of notice.
2. This criminal revision has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 02.02.2022, passed by the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Fatehpur, in Case No.122 of 2016 (Bitola @ Rinku Vs. Dharmender), whereby the application of revisionist under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for maintenance, has been rejected.
3. Learned counsel for revisionist submitted that the revisionist is wife of the opposite party No.2 and their marriage has taken place in the year 2013 but after marriage she was harassed by the opposite party No.2 and his family members and that in the month of November, 2014, she was forced to leav
Point of Law : Right to claim maintenance must date back to the date of filing the application, since the period during which the maintenance proceedings remained pending is not within the control of....
Broad and expansive interpretation should be given to the term 'wife' to include even those cases where a man and woman have been living together as husband and wife for a reasonably long period of t....
(1) Standard of proof of marriage in a Section 125, Cr.P.C. proceeding is not as strict as is required in a trial for an offence under Section 494 IPC.(2) Order passed in application under Section 12....
The obligation of a husband to maintain his wife and children is not negated by claims of financial constraints, and maintenance laws are enacted for social justice to prevent dependents from falling....
Wife entitled to maintenance under Section 125 CrPC where husband fails to prove adultery or unjust refusal to cohabit; award upheld based on evidence of husband's business/land income contra labour ....
Point of law: Grant of interim maintenance - Monetary relief granted under section 125 Cr.P.C. shall be adequate, fair and reasonable and consistent with the standard of living to which the aggrieved....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the purpose of section 125 of Cr.P.C. is to prevent vagrancy and destitution, and it is a measure of social justice to protect women and child....
A wife who is financially self-sufficient is not entitled to maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C., especially if she has not approached the court with clean hands.
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
