Advocates:
['TANUJ SEMWAL', '', 'RAJ KUMAR SINGH', 'VAIBHAV', 'RADHA ARYA', 'G A']

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

Criminal Revision No. 85 of 2018

Deepak Bhist

.…Revisionist

Versus

Megha Bhist and others

.…Respondents.

Present :

Ms. Radha Arya, Advocate for the revisionist.

Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand.

Mr. Vijay Khanduri, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

Dated: 4^th July, 2019

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

This is a husband’s Revision, wherein, he has questioned

the propriety of the judgment dated 3^rd February, 2018, as passed in

Misc. Criminal Case No. 84 of 2016, Megha Vs. Deepak by the

Family Judge, Pauri Garhwal, while considering the application

preferred by the respondent wife under Section 125 o the Cr.P.C.

2.

As per the application, which was submitted by the

respondent No. 1, before the Family Court on 6^th September, 2016,

there are few admitted facts between the parties that the marriage

between the revisionist and respondent No. 1 was solemnized on 6^th

May, 2011, as per the Hindu rites and rituals. It is also an admitted

fact that the spouses do not have any issue of their own rather they

have adopted a girl child, who is o