NEETU RASTOGI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal revision has been filed by the revisionists Smt. Neetu Rastogi and Muskan, challenging the order dated 13.4.2007 by which application filed under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was partially allowed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Faizabad, and by which application for the claim of maintenance by the wife was rejected, and claim for Muskan was allowed; and opposite party no.2 was directed to pay Rs.1000/ - per month from the date of application till the date of her attaining majority, or her marriage.

(2.) IT was submitted by the learned counsel for the revisionists that application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was wrongly rejected for the wife, as there is no denial of fact that revisionist no.1 and opposite party no.2 are husband and wife. Revisionist no.1 was subjected to curelty by opposite party no.2, and in view of this, she is living separately with a justfied reason. It was further submitted that the amount awarded by Principal Judge, Family Court for revisionist no.2 is also on lower side, and in view of growing costs of living and studies, the amount should be increased to Rs.3000/ - per month.

(3.) NO one has appeared from the side of opposite party no.2. I have heard Shri S.M. Munis Jafari, learned counsel for the revisionists and Shri Sharad Dixit, learned AGA for the State respondent and also perused the record.