SHARIF AHMAD Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There is no one present on behalf of the revisionist even on the revision of the list. It appears that non-appearance of the revisionist is not unwitting, as he left midway the proceedings before the lower court as well.

(2.) Mr Ateeq Ahmad Khan and Mr Sudama Ji Shandilya, holding brief of Mr Vivek Shandilya are present and heard for respondent No. 2.

(3.) The revision has been preferred against the order dated 06.03.1995 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Jhansi in Case No. 224 of 1990, under section 125 Cr.P.C. granting maintenance of Rs. 400/- a month to respondent No. 2 from the date of application.