MUSTAKIM Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Sumit Goyal, learned counsel for revisionist and Ms. Anjum Haq, learned A.G.A.

(2.) It is urged on behalf of revisionist that the liability of a father to maintain a daughter under Section 125 Cr.P.C. continues till such time, she has not attained majority and the view taken by the court below is in the teeth of the judgments of the Apex Court in the case of Amarendra Kumar Paul v. Maya Paul and others, 2009 3 SCC(Cri) 868 and that of this Court in the case of Amod Kumar Srivastava v. State of U.P. and others, 2008 3 ACC 591.

(3.) Per contra, learned A.G.A. would submit that the view taken by the court below is sustainable in law and the revision is liable to be dismissed.