ARVIND KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Ravindra Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri C.B. Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

(2.) The present criminal revision has been filed challenging the order dtd. 6/8/2025 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Azamgarh in Case No. 748 of 2024 (Km. Rittika Vs. Arvind Kumar) under Sec. 144 B.N.S.S., Police Station Tahabarpur, District Azamgarh, whereby the application moved by the revisionist seeking impleadment of the mother of the minor child as a party in the proceedings has been rejected.

(3.) Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that the minor child is the daughter of the revisionist and Smt. Poonam. It is contended that the revisionist is working as a Railway Clerk and is earning about Rs.41,000.00 per month, whereas the mother of the minor child, namely Smt. Poonam, is working as a Police Constable and is earning about Rs.55,000.00 per month. It is argued that since both parents are earning members, the liability to maintain the minor child is a joint and shared responsibility and, therefore, the mother of the child ought to have been impleaded as a party in the proceedings.