AJAY KUMAR ARYA Vs. ANGITA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision preferred under Section 397/401 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as CrPC) is directed against the judgment and order dated 9.2.2007 passed by the Additional Family Judge, Roorkee in Misc. Case No. 189/2006, Ajay Kumar Arya v. Smt. Angita u/s 125(5) read with Section 127(2) CrPC, whereby the learned court below has ordered to issue the recovery warrant against the revisionist and dismissed the aforesaid application of the revisionist which was filed for setting aside the judgment and order dated 9.10.2006 whereby the application of the respondent no. 1 under Section 125 CrPC was allowed and the revisionist was directed to pay maintenance of Rs. 800/- per month to the respondent no. 1 with effect from the date of making the application i.e. 17.11.2003.

(2.) Briefly stated facts of the case are that the respondent no. 1 had filed an application for maintenance under Section 125 CrPC stating that she was married to the revisionist on 5.3.2001 as per Hindu rites and her parents had given dowry more than their status. Soon after the marriage, her husband/revisionist and her in-laws started harassing her for the dowry and demanded Rs. 50,000/-. On 6.5.2002, she was also beaten by her husband/revisionist and her in-laws with lathis and danda and thereafter she came to her maternal house and since then she has been living there. With these averments she moved the aforesaid application claiming maintenance of Rs. 5000/- per month by stating that she is illiterate and she has got no source of livelihood, whereas the revisionist has enough agricultural land and he is also engaged in dairy business and he earns Rs. 15,000/- per month. The revisionist contested the case by filing his objections. Both the parties also adduced their evidence.

(3.) After hearing learned Counsel for the parties and after appreciating the evidence on record and taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, learned Additional Family Judge, Roorkee vide judgment and order dated 9.10.2006 allowed the aforesaid application of the respondent no. 1 and directed the revisionist to pay Rs. 800/- per month with effect from the date of making the application i.e. 17.11.2003. Thereafter revisionist moved an application under Section 125(5) read with Section 127(2) CrPC for setting aside the aforesaid judgment and order dated 9.10.2006 on the basis of changed circumstances, which was dismissed by the Additional Family Judge, Roorkee vide judgment and order dated 9.2.2007 holding that all the grounds raised by the revisionist have already been discussed at the time of passing the judgment and order dated 9.10.2006 on the maintenance application of the respondent no. 1 and further also directed to issue the recovery warrant against the revisionist. Hence, this revision has been filed by the revisionist.