JAMUNA Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of the instant criminal revision, revisionists have assailed the judgement and order dtd. 12/7/2022 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Lalitpur in Case No.49 of 2016 (Smt. Jamuna and others vs. Akhlesh), under Sec. 125 Cr.P.C.

(2.) By the impugned order, trial Court has rejected the application of the revisionists filed under Sec. 125 Cr.P.C. on the ground that revisionist no.1 along with her two daughters are residing with her mother-in-law and opposite party No.2 (husband) has given expenses to his wife and two minor children.

(3.) It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the revisionists that marriage of the revisionist No.1 (Smt. Jamuna) was solemnized with opposite party No.2 (Akhilesh) on 26/6/2007 according to Hindu Rites and Rituals. In the said marriage, parents of the revisionist No.1 had given sufficient dowry according to their capacity. The opposite party No.2 (husband) and in-laws of the revisionist No.1 were not satisfied with the dowry given to them in the marriage and they demanded Rs.1,50,000.00, but on non-fulfilment of the additional dowry, they mentally and physically tortured revisionist no. 1. Out of wedlock of the revisionist No.1 and opposite party No.2, two female children were born, namely, Km. Lali, aged about 12 years and Km. Kiriti, aged about 10 years. After the birth of two female children, husband and in-laws of the revisionist No.1 intensified their harassment for bringing of Rs.1,50,000.00 as additional dowry and they also started beating and threatening for divorce. It has also been submitted that opposite party No.2 is a good confectioner and earns Rs.30,000.00 per month by taking contract in marriages and other functions. It has also been submitted that revisionist No.1 has claimed Rs.15,000.00 per month for herself and Rs.4000.00 per month each for her two minor daughters as maintenance allowance.