Raj Mani Chauhan,J. - (1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, learned Counsel for the opposite party No. 2 and learned A.G.A. as well as perused the documents available on record.
(2.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the Petitioner for quashing the impugned judgment and order dated 4.4.2009, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Sitapur in Criminal Revision No. 430 of 2008; Arvind Kumar v/s. Smt. Kanchan Criminal Revision No. 430 of 2008, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge has partly allowed the revision and modified the order dated 10.6.2008, passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Sitapur (hereinafter referred to as the 'Judicial Magistrate) in Criminal Case No. 45 of 2006; Smt. Kanchan v/s. Arvind Kumar Criminal Case No. 45 of 2006, reducing the amount of maintenance from Rs. 2000/ -to 1000/ -.
(3.) The relevant facts giving rise to the present petition, in brief, are that the opposite party No. 2 Smt. Kanchan who is wife of the Petitioner had moved an application under Sec. 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sitapur against the Petitioner for maintenance. The application was contested by the Petitioner. The parties had filed oral and documentary evidence in support of their contentions. The learned Judicial Magistrate vide judgment and order dated 10.6.2008 allowed the application filed by the opposite party No. 2 and directed the Petitioner to pay maintenance allowance to the opposite party No. 2 at the rate of Rs. 2,000/ -per month from the date of application. The learned Judicial Magistrate further ordered that the maintenance allowance payable before the date of judgment i.e. 10.6.2008 will be paid in six equal installments within 12 months.;