VIPIN KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Nikhil Kumar, learned counsel for the revisionist, Mr. Bhagwan Dutt Pandey, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and the learend A.G.A. for the State.

(2.) The instant criminal revision has been preferred with a prayer to quash/set aside the judgment and order dtd. 26/7/2024 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Maharajganj in Maintenance Case No. 233 of 2017 (CNR-UPMH020005882017) (Smt. Sarika Singh Vs. Vipin Singh) under Sec. 125 Cr.P.C., whereby the trial court, while allowing the instant application filed by opposite party no.2, has directed the revisionist to pay Rs.10,000.00 per month to opposite party no.2 towards maintenance allowance from the date of filing of instant application.

(3.) The arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the revisionist are enumerated hereunder:-