SB Cr.rev.No.233/09. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.233/2009. Smt.Parwati Vs. Shri Ramswaroop Date of order : August 20, 2010. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Anil Upman for the petitioner. Shri J.R. Tantia for the respondent. BY THE COURT:- Heard learned counsel for petitioner as learned counsel for the respondent and perused the relevant documents placed before me. 2) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner in a situation where she had been left remediless in that petitioner-wife filed an application u/Ss.125 & 127 Cr.P.C. before the Family Court, Ajmer but that application was rejected by the impugned-order dated 30/7/2008 on the premise that in an appeal filed by the petitioner before this Court being D.B.Civil Misc.Appeal No.86/2003 against the order of the Family Court, Ajmer, this Court had directed Rs.2 lacs to be paid to the petitioner-wife as lump-sum Alimony in full and final settlement of her claim. This Court in the present revision petition directed the petitioner to furnish her bank account number to the respondent-husband vide SB Cr.rev.No.233/09. 2 order dated 23/4/2010 and respondent was directed to deposit the said amount. When the revision petition was filed, petitioner raised a grievance that Rs.2 lacs has not been deposited by the respondent despite the order of this Court being passed on 17/4/2007 to the same effect. 3) This Court vide order dated 23/4/2010 required the petitioner to furnish her bank account number to the respondent, who was directed to deposit the said amount within two weeks from the date such account number is furnished. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the respondent give out that he had informed the respondent and his Advocate Shri S.N. Sharma but the learned counsel for petitioner submitted that still neither amount of Rs.2 lacs as directed by this Court three years ago has been deposited nor petitioner was allowed to prosecute the remedy under Section 127 Cr.P.C. 4) In a situation that has arisen consequent upon non-compliance of the order passed by this Court on 17/4/2007 while leaving right of the petitioner open to file a contempt petition or execution petition with regard to implementation of that order, I make it open to the petitioner either to prosecute her application u/S.127 Cr.P.C. which she filed in regard to the order earlier passed by the Court on 17/4/2007 whereby Rs.2 lacs was ordered to be paid to her as maintenance or to prosecute her application SB Cr.rev.No.233/09. 3 u/S.125 Cr.P.C. Since the respondent has failed to deposit Rs.2 lacs awarded as Permanent Alimony to the petitioner, situation has arisen with which the petitioner is not receiving any amount of maintenance even after decision of this Court in appeal referred to supra, I set-aside the order dated 30/7/2008 and remit the matter back to the Family Court, Ajmer for its adjudication afresh in accordance with law in the light of the observation made above. 5) The revision petition is disposed of accordingly. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. anil SB Cr.rev.No.233/09. 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CRIMINAL MISC.STAY APPLICATION NO.228/2009. IN S.B. CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.233/2009. Smt.Parwati Vs. Shri Ramswaroop Date of order : August 20, 2010. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Anil Upman for the applicant-petitioner. Shri J.R. Tantia for the respondent. BY THE COURT:- Consequent upon disposal of the revision petition itself, this stay application does not survive and the same is consequently dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. anil