JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Rule. Service of rule is waived by Mr. Manan Mehta, Ld. APP and Mr. Abichandani, Ld.
Advocate for respondent nos. 1 and 2
respectively.
(2.) Both these petitions are arising out of the same impugned judgment and order dated
31/3/2011 rendered in consolidated judgment in Criminal Revision Application No. 23 of 2010 and
Criminal Revision Application No. 34 of 2010 by
the Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar and, therefore,
they are heard together and being decided by this
common judgment.
(3.) Before the Sessions Court, Criminal Revision Application No. 23 of 2010 was preferred
by Varshaben Himatlal Vejani; whereas Criminal
Revision Application No. 34 of 2010 was preferred
by her husband Rameshkumar Manubhai Sanghavi,
wherein both of them have challenged the judgment
and order dated 4/3/2010 rendered in Misc.
Criminal Application No. 496/2008 by the Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Bhavnagar, which was
preferred by wife Varshaben with her two minor
daughters under section 125 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure [for short 'Cr. P.C.'] for
maintenance of all of them from her husband and
father of minor daughters, namely Rameshbhai
Sanghavi. By such order dated 4/3/2010, the
Magistrate has directed to increase the amount of
maintenance of minor daughters only from Rs.500/ -
pm to Rs.2,500/ - pm so far as minor daughter
Sonal is concerned and from Rs.500/ - pm to
Rs.2,000/ - pm so far as minor daughter Anjali is
concerned. Whereas the Magistrate has rejected
the application for enhancement of maintenance so
far as wife Varshaben is concerned. Therefore,
wife has preferred revision before the Sessions
Court for her maintenance and husband has
preferred revision before the Sessions Court to
quash and set aside such order of enhancement of
maintenance. However, the Sessions Court has
dismissed both the revision applications and,
therefore, order of Magistrate dated 4/3/2010 is
confirmed. In view of such situation, before this
Court, again husband has challenged both the
orders, as aforesaid, regarding enhancement of
maintenance in favour of the daughters; whereas
wife has challenged both the orders by which
amount of maintenance is refused to be enhanced
in her favour.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.