Advocates:
['LOVEKUSH KUMAR MISHRA', '', 'PRABHAKAR TRIPATHI', 'G A', '', 'BIRENDRA SINGH', 'YASH PRATAP SINGH']

Court No. - 68

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3545 of 2022

Revisionist :- Smt. Aditi Mishra And Another

Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Revisionist :- Lovekush Kumar Mishra,Prabhakar

Tripathi

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Birendra Singh,Yash

Pratap Singh

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

Heard learned counsel for the revisionists, learned AGA for the

State, Mr. Birendra Singh, learned counsel for the opposite

party no.2 and perused the record.

The instant revisionist has been filed against the impugned

judgement and order dated 04.08.2022 passed by Additional

Principal Judge, Family Court No.3, Agra in Maintenance Case

No.499 of 2019, under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station

Hariparwat, District Agra for enhance the interim maintenance

amount from Rs.5000/- to Rs.40,000/-.

Learned counsel for the revisionists has submitted that the

opposite party no.2 is husband of revisionist no.1 and is earning

huge money from his online business in the field of Vadic

Kundali, Numerology, Loshu-Grid and Palmistry who himself

claims to be a scientific Astro Pahal. The opposite party no.2 is

also working as spiritual seeker and meditation trainer and is

also earning huge money but the trial court while passing the

interim maintenance order has committed manifest error of law

and the same has been passed without considering the evidence

and facts available on record, hence, the same may be

enhanced as prayed for.

Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the

opposite party no.2 have drawn the attention towards the

finding of the court below wherein it is admitted that the

revisionist no.1 is a government teacher and getting salary of

Rs.25,000/- but presently she is getting salary of Rs.45,000/-

per month which is more than the income of the husband.

After having heard the learned counsel for the parties present

and perused the impugned order as well as material brought on

record, I am of the view that the impugned order is based upon

relevant consideration and supported by cogent reasons, the

same does not suffer from any irregularity, illegality or

infirmity requiring any interference by this Court.

The revision fails and is hereby dismissed. The revision is,

accordingly, dismissed.

However, considering the facts of the case, the trial court is

directed to conclude the proceeding pending before it, in

accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period

of six months from the date of production of certified copy of

this Court, if there is no legal impediment.

Order Date :- 6.1.2023

Ajeet

Digitally signed by :-

AJEET KUMAR PATEL

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad