KM. ANKITA DIKSHIT Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Mohammad Aslam Beg, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Ravish Chandra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

(2.) The present revision has been preferred with a prayer to admit it and set aside the judgment and order dtd. 6/4/2016 passed by the Principal Judge/A.D.J. Family Court, Lucknow in Misc. Criminal Case No. 932 of 2001 (Km. Ankita Dikshit Vs. Rajnesh Dikshit), under Sec. 125 Cr.P.C. after summoning the records of the court below with a further prayer to stay the implementation and operation of the aforesaid order and also to direct the opposite party No. 2 to provide Rs.10,000.00 per month towards interim maintenance to the revisionist and Rs.40,00,000.00 for the purposes of marriage and education of the revisionist during the pendency of revision.

(3.) Km. Ankita Dikshit, the revisionist file Application No. Kha-3 through her mother, namely, Smt. Sunita Dikshit, for granting maintenance of Rs.5,000.00 per month to be paid by her father, the opposite party No. 2. As per the application, the statement is made that after marriage the mother of the revisionist had went to the house of the opposite party No. 2 and out of the wedlock of the opposite party No. 2 and Smt. Sunita Dikshit, the mother of the revisionist, she (revisionist) was born, who has presently attained the age of ten years. She mentioned in the application that the revisionist is studying in St. Marry School, R.D.S.O., Lucknow and she needs maintenance to carry out her education and maintain her life. The mother of the revisionist was working in H.A.L. Division, Lucknow and was residing in the house of her maternal uncle. After one year of the marriage of opposite party No. 2 and her mother, the revisionist was born. The mother was misbehaved by the inlaws only because a son was not born out of the wedlock. The pressure was created on the mother of the revisionist to give divorce to opposite party No. 2 so as the opposite party No. 2 could perform a second marriage with other woman. The mother of the revisionist was forced to take rented house outside, whereas there were two tenants in the house of the opposite party No. 2 and the mother of the revisionist was not allowed to live in that house. It has further been stated that in 2000, the mother of the revisionist was deserted and ousted from the house of the opposite party No. 2 by scolding and rebuking her. It is further stated that opposite party No. 2 is Personal Assistant of the Minister in the Department of Mother and Child Welfare in the U.P. Secretariat and had handsome salary, therefore, she requested to pay Rs.5,000.00 per month.