VINEET SEHGAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Rajiv Lochan Shukla, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Anand Srivastava, learned counsel for opposite party no. 3 as well as learned AGA appearing on behalf of the opposite party nos. 1 and 2.

(2.) This revision under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. is directed against the order dated 7.10.2006 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Meerut in Case No. 484 of 2003, Sapna Sehgal Vs. Vineet Sehgal under Section 125 Cr.P.C., whereby the application for maintenance in respect of wife Smt. Sapna Sehgal was rejected but was allowed in respect of Aryaman-minor son of opposite party no. 3. It was directed by the Family Court that Aryaman shall be entitled to Rs. 6000/- per month as maintenance allowance. ? of the amount shall be paid by his father-revisionist and 1/4th of the amount shall be born by his mother-opposite party no. 3. Feeling aggrieved, the father- Vineet Sehgal has come before this Court by means of this revision.

(3.) The facts are that opposite party no. 3- Smt. Sapna Sehgal filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. against the revisionist claiming maintenance for herself and her minor son- Aryaman with the allegations that they were married on 2.10.2000 and Aryaman was born on 16.9.2001. The relations between the spouses were not cordial, she was harassed and subjected to cruelty by her husband and on 11.6.2001, she was turned out of matrimonial home and she was living with her father. She claimed a sum of Rs. 11000/- per month as maintenance allowance for herself and her minor son.