IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL CRIMINAL REVISION No.159 of 2005 Ram Prakash Saklani … Revisionist Versus State of Uttaranchal & others … Respondents Dated: July 13, 2010 Sri Sandeep Tandon, Adv. for the revisionist Sri Amit Bhatt, Addl. GA for the State Sri Vinod Sharma, Adv. for the respondent nos.3 & 4 HON. DHARAM VEER, J. This criminal revision, preferred under Section 397/401 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as Cr.P.C.) r/w Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, is directed against the judgment and order dated 28.07.2005 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun in Crl. Case No.27 of 2003, Smt. Sita Saklani & others Vs. Ram Prakash Saklani. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. In brief the facts of the case are that the respondent no.3-Smt. Sita Saklani moved an application u/s 125 Cr.P.C. with the allegations that she got married with the revisionist on 26.6.1982 as per Hindu RITES and thereafter she was brought at Dehradun by the revisionist at his house and since then she is residing at that house. After the marriage, the respondent no.3 started performing her marital obligations, but the revisionist never treated her cordially rather he used to taunt her for bringing less dowry. The respondent no.3 used to tolerate all the cruelties of the revisionist in the hope that by the lapse of time things will be well, but even having the three children, the revisionist 2 did not mend his ways. Thereafter, she was subjected to physical and mental cruelties several times. On 16.12.2002, the revisionist came to the house at about 6 PM and under intoxication started abusing respondent no.3. When she tried to make the revisionist understand, on this he assaulted respondent no.3 on her private parts, bitten the finger of her right hand and started throttling her. After that he went away from there and did not return till the date of filing of complaint nor he paid any maintenance allowance. The revisionist is working in Telecom Department, Premnagar, Dehradun on the post of Storekeeper and earns Rs.12,000/- per month and hence Rs.7,500/- per month was sought as maintenance allowance. The revisionist also filed his written statement and denied the allegations made against him. After hearing counsel for the parties, perusing the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the court below vide order dated 28.7.2005 partly allowed the petition filed by the respondent no.3 thereby directing the revisionist to pay Rs.3,500/- per month to the respondent no.3 for her own and for maintenance of her son, Master Ankit- respondent no.4. Feeling aggrieved, the instant revision has been preferred. So far as the income of the revisionist is concerned, the court below rightly held that the revisionist is working in Telecom Department. He also furnished his two pay-slips issued by the Department, in which his gross salary has been shown as Rs.10,267/- and Rs.11,270/- respectively. Hence, the court below rightly held that it is established that the revisionist is working in Telecom Department and draws a handsome salary and therefore, he has sufficient means to maintain his family. The court below also rightly held that for the maintenance of her son- respondent no.4, Rs.1,500/- per month is also required while for the own maintenance of respondent no.3, Rs.2,000/- per month is required. From the overall analysis 3 of the matter, the court below rightly awarded Rs.3,500/- per month towards maintenance of respondents no.3 and 4 against the revisionist and the Court does not find any justification to interfere with the judgment and order passed by the court below. Even I do not find any illegality, impropriety or incorrectness in the judgment and order dated 28.07.2005 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun. For the reasons recorded above, the revision is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed. The judgment and order dated 28.7.2005 passed by the court below is affirmed. (Dharam Veer, J.) July 13, 2010 Rajeev Dang