- (1.) Sri M.S. Pandey, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Sanjeev Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 2 and 3 and learned A.G.A. for the State are present.
(2.) The instant criminal revision has been preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 25.9.2012 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, District Bareilly in Criminal Misc. Case No.294 of 2008 (Smt. Suchitra and another vs. Pradeep Kumar Saxena) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station- Subhash Nagar, District- Bareilly, by which learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bareilly has directed the opposite party, Pradeep Kumar Saxena, to pay the sum of Rs. 3,000/- per month to the applicant/ opposite party no.2 Smt. Suchitra and a sum of Rs. 2,000/- per month to the applicant/opposite party no.3, Km. Tanvi.
(3.) The facts which have been mentioned in the impugned judgment and order dated 25.9.2012 in narrow compass are stated as follows:- "Opposite party no.2, Smt. Suchitra was allegedly married to the revisionist Pradeep Kumar Saxena on 21.2.2007. The opposite party no.2, Smt. Suchitra was allegedly tortured by her husband and in-laws due to demand of dowry. Meanwhile, she became pregnant on 15.7.2007. She was ousted from her in-laws' place and she gave birth to one female baby in her parent's house on 24.1.2008. The revisionist Pradeep Kumar Saxena earns Rs.12,000/- per month by working in the Laxmi Printing Press, Mathura and Rs.5,000/- per month in part time jobs and Rs.4,000/- per month as rent of his own house. Thus, she has prayed that she may be awarded Rs.5,000/- per month for herself and Rs.4,000/- per month for her infant baby girl as a maintenance allowance. The revisionist Pradeep Kumar Saxena denied the assertions made by the opposite party no.2 in her application for the maintenance allowance and has stated that opposite party no.2 was never married to him and she did not reside with him as his legally wedded wife. Opposite party no.2 was married to one Sushil Kumar Saxena s/o Late Om Prakash Saxena r/o Mohalla Chaukhanda, Raizada Inter College near Samsabad, District- Farrukhabad and she was residing with him as his legally wedded wife. Due to some misunderstanding between her and her husband Sushil Kumar Saxena, on 03.09.1991 she initiated a proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. registered as Case No.1259 of 1991 in the court which was dismissed on 12.7.1993. Due to absence of the opposite party no.2, she concealed the fact from the court that the revisionist was married to Smt. Anita Sexena d/o Rajendra Saxena, r/o Mohalla Madarsa, District Bulandshahar prior to the alleged marriage with the opposite party no.2. Due to this nuptial knot, she has been blessed with one son and one daughter and has been leading his marital life happily. Wife of the revisionist Smt. Anita Saxena has initiated a civil suit of declaration for declaring the aforesaid marriage with the opposite party no.2 as null and void in the court of the learned Civil Judge, (S.D.), Mathura which is pending as ex-parte in the court and the opposite party no.2 is not appearing in the court intentionally.";