Jayashree Tiwari, J. - (1.) CASE called out in the revised list. Heard learned Counsel for the revisionist. The present criminal revision has been filed against the judgment and order dated 25.1.2007 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, allowing the application filed under Section 127, Cr.P.C. praying enhancement of maintenance allowance registered as Misc. Case No. 74 of 2002. It is contended that in application while exercising the power under Section 127, Cr.P.C. learned Judge, Family Court has de novo, decided the application under Section 125, Cr.P.C.
(2.) KEEPING in mind this argument raised by the learned Counsel for the revisionist as also argument advanced by him, it had come to light that the application under Section 125, Cr.P.C. was never decided on merit. It was decided on the basis of the mutual compromise recorded in between the parties and verified before the Court. So the contention that the matter under Section 125, Cr.P.C. was judicially decided is not the correct position and it was a compromise decree under Section 127, Cr.P.C. The Court can consider the matter as provided under Section 127, Cr.P.C. which lays down as follows: Section 127, Cr.P.C. Alteration in allowance - -(1) On proof of a change in the circumstances of any person, receiving, under Section 125 a monthly allowance for the maintenance or interim maintenance, or ordered under the same Section to pay a monthly allowance for the maintenance, or interim maintenance, to his wife, child, father or mother, as the case may be, the Magistrate may make such alteration, as he thinks fit, in the allowance for the maintenance or the interim maintenance, as the case may be. (2) Where it appears to the Magistrate that, in consequence of any decision of a competent Civil Court, any order made under section 125 should be cancelled or varied, he shall cancel the order or, as the case may be, vary the same accordingly. (3) Where any order has been made under Section 125 in favour of a woman who has been divorced by, or has obtained a divorce from, her husband, the Magistrate shall, if he satisfied that - - (a) the woman has, after the date of such divorce, remarried, cancel such as from the date the date of her remarriage, (b) the woman has been divorced by her husband and that she has of the sum which, under any customary or personal law applicable to the parties, was payable on such divorce, cancel such order - - (i) in the case where such sum was paid before such order, from the date on which such order was made, (ii) in any other case, from the date of expiry of the period, if any, from which maintenance has been actually paid by the husband to the woman, (c) the woman has obtained a divorce from her husband and that she had voluntarily surrendered her rights to maintenance or interim maintenance, as the case may be after her divorce, cancel the order from the date thereof. (4) At the time of making any decree for the recovery of any maintenance or dowry by any person, to whom monthly allowance for the maintenance and interim maintenance or any of them has been ordered to be paid under Section 125, the Civil Court shall take into account that sum which has been paid to, or recovered by, such person as monthly allowance for the maintenance and interim maintenance or any of them, as the case may be in pursuance of the said order.
(3.) BUT a bare perusal of the order shows that the Court has only discussed and recorded the findings of change circumstance and also the income of the revisionist and not on all the points as are required to be discussed for determination of an application under Section 125, Cr.P.C.;