Skip to content
Order
  • Library
  • Features
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact
Get started
Book a Demo

Order

At Order.law, we’re building India’s leading AI-powered legal research platform.Designed for solo lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, Order helps you find relevant case law, analyze judgments, and draft with confidence faster and smarter.

Product

  • Features
  • Blog

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms

Library

  • Acts
  • Judgments
© 2025 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. Allahabad High Court/
  4. 2024/
  5. May

Dilshad Ali @ Raju Ali vs. State of U.p. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Decided on 31 May 2024• Citation: /618/2024• Allahabad High Court
Download PDF

Read Judgment


                                          Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:41635
                             Court No. - 15                                       
                             Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 618 of 2024          
                             Revisionist :- Dilshad Ali @ Raju Ali                
                             Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt.
                             Lko. And 2 Others                                    
                             Counsel for Revisionist :- Saurabh Saxena,Mata Prasad
                             Chaturvedi,Shiv Kumar Yadav                          
                             Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.                   
                             Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.                      
                             Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the
                             State-respondent No.1.                               
                             In view of the proposed order being passed, notices to
                             respondent Nos.2 and 3 is dispensed with.            
                             This revision has been filed against the order dated 10.04.2024
                             passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Lucknow in Criminal
                             Misc. Case No.1167 of 2020 filed under Section 125 Cr.P.C. by
                             which the maintenance of Rs.6,000/- per month and Rs.2,000/-
                             per month has been awarded respectively to respondent Nos.2
                             and 3.                                               
                             Perused the record.                                  
                             Perusal of the record shows that respondent Nos.2 and 3 are
                             destitute and are unable to maintain themselves. Since the
                             revisionist has re-married after leaving the respondent No.2
                             therefore, she is residing away from him which is a sufficient
                             cause. No evidence has been filed nor any averment has been
                             made by the revisionist before the learned trial court that he is
                             incapable of earning his livelihood.                 
                             On the contrary, in his proprietorship, Pawan Steel Fabricators
                             Lakadmandi near Gueyan Devi Mandir Shadatganj, Lucknow a
                             shop is shown thus, learned trial court while deciding the issue
                             No.3 has rightly concluded that in spite of the fact that

                             revisionist is capable of maintaining the respondents he has
                             neglected them. Respondent No.2 is a legally wedded wife of
                             the revisionist and respondent No.3 is his minor daughter.
                             Respondent No.2 is residing away from the revisionist for a
                             sufficient cause. Revisionist is having enough resources to
                             maintain the respondents however, he has neglected them
                             towards their maintenance as such they are entitled for the
                             maintenance.                                         
                             Considering all these aspects, this Court finds that learned trial
                             court has rightly concluded that respondent Nos.2 and 3 are
                             entitled for monthly maintenance of Rs.6,000/- and Rs.4,000/-
                             per month, there is no illegality or impropriety in the order
                             impugned. Revision being devoid of merits is accordingly
                             dismissed.                                           
                             Order Date :- 31.5.2024                              
                             Saurabh Yadav/-                                      
    Digitally signed by :-                                                        
    SAURABH YADAV                                                                 
    High Court of Judicature at Allahabad,                                        
    Lucknow Bench