CourtKutchehry.com
High Courts

Mohiuddin vs State of U.P.& Ors.

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 17 August 2000 · Citation: (2000) 08 AHC CK 0090

HON’BLE JUDGES
B.K.Rathi, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 125
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Revision No. 1722 of 1999
Download PDFAsk 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

7 paragraphs · 358 words

B.K. Rathi, J.—The Judge Family Court, Azamgarh by an order dated 4899 granted maintenance at the rate of Rs. 300/ cash per month from the date of application to opposite parties Nos. 2 to 4 under Section 125, Cr. P.C. Aggrieved by that order, the present revision has been preferred.

2.

I have heard Sri D.K. Srivastava, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri J. A. Azami, learned counsel for opposite parties Nos. 2 to 4 and have gone through the record.

3.

The only argument raised by the learned counsel for the revisionist is that the judgment of the Judge Family Court is not a judgment in the eye of law. He has passed a telephonic order. He has not considered the evidence. Oral evidence has been adduced, but it was not considered and the order is not a speaking order.

4.

It is also contended that the applicant pleaded in his WS. that he has been given maintenance to opposite parties Nos. 2 to 4 through Smt. Taslim, his second wife and real sister of the mother of opposite parties. That Smt. Taslim was examined in the Court as D. W. 2 and the copy of her statement has been filed. It is contended that in place of considering her statement, the learned Judge Family Court has mentioned that Smt. Taslim has not been examined.

5.

After considering the arguments, I am fully satisfied that the learned Judge Family Court has passed judgment without considering the evidence on record and going through the record. The order is wholly arbitrary. It is, therefore, fit to be set aside.

6.

The revision is, therefore, allowed and the impugned order dated 4899 passed by the Judge Family Court, Azamgarh is quashed. The matter is sent back to the Judge Family Court, Azamgarh for redeciding the dispute after providing fresh opportunity to the parties to produce evidence and hearing arguments. However, the evidence on record shall, subject to just exceptions, be read as evidence after remand. The matter shall be decided expeditiously and the parties are directed to appear before the Judge Family Court, Azamgarh to receive further order.

Revision allowed.