CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Karan Singh vs Smt. Brahmwati and Another

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 15 January 1991 · Citation: (1991) 2 DMC 292

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.D. Bajaj, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 125, 482
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 638-M of 1989
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 331 words

S.D. Bajaj, J.—Heard. In 125 Cr.P.C. application No. 1/4 of 1986 filed on 6.1.1986 learned trial Court granted to the wife and daughter of the petitioner maintenance at the rate of Rs. 300/- per mensem recoverable from the petitioner as father of respondent No. 2 and husband of respondent No 1 on 11.2.1988; with effect from the date of application viz. 6.1.1986. Revision filed against the order of Maintenance aforesaid was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, Faridabad on September 1, 1988. Hence Criminal Misc. No. 638-M of 1989 in this Court.

2.

I have heard Shri Arun Jain, Advocate, for the petitioner, Shri Mahesh Grover, Advocate, for the respondents and have carefully gone through the entire material brought on record by the parties aforesaid.

3.

Marriage was solemnised on May 30, 1978. Wife was allegedly turned out of her matrimonial home in December, 1982. She gave birth to respondent No. 2 on 4.1.1983 during the subsistence of marriage wed-lock with the petitioner. Petitioner is earning Rs. 3000/- per mensem from practice as Registered Medical Practitioner and earns another Rs. 20,000/- to Rs. 25,000/- per annum from his agricultural lands. Maintenance at the rate of Rs 200/- per mensem was awarded to the wife and Rs. 100/- per mensem to the daughter. It cannot, therefore, be termed as excessive by any standard.

4.

Furthermore, the petitioner having tried his luck with the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad in Criminal Revision No 7 filed on 11.8.1988 which was decided by the learned lower Appellate Court on 1.9.1988 second revision even under the garb of a quashing petition u/s 487 Cr.P.C. does not lie to this Court. In line with the Supreme Court observations in Rajan Kumar Machananda v. State of Karnataka, Judgments Today 1987(4) SC 637, Criminal Misc. No. 638-M of 1969 is, therefore, liable to be dismissed as incompetent as well.

5.

For the reasons given above Criminal Misc. filed by the husband-petitioner Karan Singh fails and is accordingly dismissed.