Patna High CourtCR. REV./788/2017dismissed

Rakesh Kumar v. Sunesha Devi

2022-12-15Mr. Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL REVISION No.788 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-1111 Thana- District- ====================================================== Rakesh Kumar son of Late Bunilal Yadav, Resident of Village- Gamharia, P.S. Pachrukhi, District- Siwan.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

Sunesha Devi Wife of Rakesh Kumar, Daugther of Shankar Yadav, Currently Residing at Village Atarsua, P.S. Siwan Muffasil, District- Siwan. ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 15-12-2022 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner to press this application.

By the impugned order dated 19.04.2017 passed in Maintenance Case No. 82 of 2010, learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Siwan has awarded a sum of Rs.3,500/- per month as maintenance to the applicant-wife.

Considering that learned counsel for the petitioner is not putting appearance but the case is of the year 2017 and it relates to maintenance of a neglected woman, this Court has gone through the records and perused the impugned judgment. On perusal thereof, it appears that the learned Family Court has considered the evidence adduced on behalf of the applicant-wife and the O.P.-husband. Both the parties had led their respective evidences. The learned Family Court has recorded finding that the applicant is a legally wedded wife of

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.788 of 2017(2) dt.15-12-2022 2/2 the O.P. and the O.P. has thrown her out of the matrimonial house on non-fulfilment of demand of dowry. The witnesses have also proved the source of income of the O.P.-husband. The learned Family Court has found that the O.P.- husband has also admitted that the applicant is his legally wedded wife. In these circumstances, the impugned judgment has been passed.

This Court finds no plausible ground to interfere with the same.

Let the Principal Judge, Family Court, Siwan proceed to execute the impugned judgment as expeditiously as possible. This application is disposed of accordingly.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) SUSHMA2/- U T