- (1.) V. K. Chaturvedi, J. Pursuant to order dated 13-12-2000, Revisionist, Vishal Tandon and opposite party Smt. Priyanka Tandon are present in Court today. On being enquired from the Court. Smt. Priyanka Tandon stated that just after her marriage, revisionist started ill-treat ing her on account of demand of dowry and she was also beaten by him and was turned out from the house and now she is living with her parents and she does not want to live with her husband. Revisionist, Vishal stated before this Court that he is jobless and is doing nothing. In view of the state ment of both the parties, there is no pos sibility of reconciliation.
(2.) THIS revision is preferred against the judgment and order dated 14-9-2000 passed by Ilnd A. C. J. M. , Saharanpur in criminal case No. 192 of 1998, Smt. Priyanka v. Vishal Tandon by which ap plication of opposite party, Smt. Priyanka Tandon under Section 125 Cr. PC. has been allowed and the revisionist was directed to pay her maintenance al lowance at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month from the date of order i. e. 14-9-2000. Heard Sri Tapan Ghosh, learned Counsel for the revisionist, Sri Raghuraj Kishore, learned Counsel for opposite party. It is contended by revisionist that opposite party does not want to live with the revisionist and she herself left the house of the revisionist. As such, she is not entitled to get the maintenance from the revisionist.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the opposite party contended that after her marriage, revisionist started ill- treating her on ac count of demand of dowry and was also beaten and turned out of the hosue by the revisionist and now she is living with her parents. She is doing nothing. As such, she is unable to maintain herself. After hearing the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the par ties and perusing the entire materials on record also taking into consideration the statement of bolh the parties, IInd A. C. J. M. Saharanpur, after recording the evidence of both the parties, has passed a detailed order by which application filed by opposite party under Section 125 Cr. PC. has been allowed and the revisionist was directed to pay maintenance al lowance at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month from the date of order i. e. 4- 9-2000. The amount of maintenance allowance awarded by the trial Court at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month is not excessive in these days. The impugned order under challen ges does not suffer from any illegality, in firmity and impropriety. The revision is, therefore, dismissed.;