IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL CRIMINAL REVISION No.113 of 2004 Som Prakash S/o Dile Ram R/o Village Aamwala, Tehsil Behat, Distt. Saharanpur at present Junior High School, Telpura, Atka Faram House, Basic Shiksha Parishad, Dehradun, Uttaranchal … Revisionist Versus 1. Judge of Family Court, Hardwar 2. Smt. Kiran Sharma W/o Som Prakash, R/o 348/20, West Amber Talab, Roorkee, Distt. Hardwar … Respondents Dated: April 04, 2008 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 order dated 21.06.2004 passed by Judge, Family Court, Hardwar in Misc. Case No.215 of 2002, whereby the learned Judge has issued recovery warrant against the revisionist for not paying the maintenance allowance @ Rs.300/- per month for 3 years i.e. Rs.10,800/-. 2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that Respondent No.2-Smt. Kiran Sharma moved an application u/s 125 of Cr.P.C. for maintenance allowance. On that application, learned Ist Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) Roorkee vide his order dated 9.12.1996 directed the revisionist to pay Rs.300/- per month as maintenance allowance to Respondent No.2. Thereafter, for some time, the revisionist continued to pay the same, however since 26.6.2000, the revisionist had not paid any amount of maintenance allowance to Respondent No.2. After that, Respondent No.2 moved an application u/s 125(3) of Cr.P.C. before Family Judge, Hardwar on 31.8.2002. On that 2 application, the learned Judge, Family Court, Hardwar vide his order dated 21.6.2004 issued recovery warrant against the revisionist for not paying the maintenance allowance even @ Rs.300/- per month for 3 years i.e. Rs.10,800/-. Feeling aggrieved by the said order dated 21.6.2004, the revisionist has preferred the present revision before this Court. 3. List has been revised, however no one appears on behalf of the revisionist. 4. I have perused the order dated 21.6.2004 passed by Judge, Family Court, Hardwar. The Additional Civil Judge (J.D.) Roorkee vide his order dated 9.12.1996 awarded a meager amount of Rs.300/- per month against the revisionist, however since 26.6.2000, the revisionist stopped to pay the amount of maintenance allowance to respondent no.2. Respondent No.2 is having no other source of income except this amount of maintenance allowance. The learned Judge, Family Court, Hardwar after considering all these facts and circumstances of the case vide his order dated 21.6.2004 rightly came to the conclusion that since there were no chances of compromise and the revisionist had not paid the maintenance allowance even @Rs.300/- per month for three years i.e. Rs.10,800/-, as such, the learned Judge has rightly issued the recovery warrant against the revisionist. 5. I do not find any illegality, incorrectness or impropriety in the said order dated 21.6.2004 passed by court below. 6. As such, the criminal revision is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed. The order dated 21.6.2004 passed by Judge, Family Court, Hardwar is confirmed. (Dharam Veer, J.) Rajeev Dang 3