IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR O R D E R S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.635 of 2000. Mohammed Hanif son of Shri Gulam Mohammad VERSUS Smt. Munnar Sultana daughter of Shri Shafique of Beg Date of Order :::: 17/02/2009. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Bhanwaroo Khan Mr. Abhishek Jain for Mr.G.C. Garg, Counsel for Petitioner None present for the Respondent By the Court : Petitioner-husband has moved this criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. against the order dated 25.03.2000 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Jaipur City, Jaipur, whereby the order dated 24.07.1999 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) & Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.3, Jaipur City, Jaipur has been modified and the amount of Mehar, as ordered by the trial Magistrate has been enhanced from Rs.12,500/- to Rs.25,000/-. Brief facts of the case are that a petition was filed by the respondent-wife against the petitioner- husband for grant of Mehar amount Rs.25,000/- and also the maintenance of `iddat' period. The trial Court awarded half of the Mehar amount and holding that half of the amount had already been received by the respondent-wife. Rs.500/- was also awarded in lieu of the amount of the articles demanded by the respondent-wife. A revision was preferred by the respondent- wife and the revisional Court by modifying the judgment of the trial Court ordered to pay Rs.25,000/- as Mehar amount instead of Rs.12,500/- and rests of the order was maintained. The learned counsel for the petitioner-husband pleaded that when the amount of Mehar was waived by the respondent-wife on the very day of marriage, the revisional Court illegally granted the said amount to the respondent-wife. As it was an absolute right of the respondent-wife to have condoned the Mehar amount, which she did and to this extent that the judgment passed cannot be sustainable. No one appeared on behalf of the respondent- wife. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner- husband and perused both the judgments of the Lower Courts as well as material available on record. The trial Court, after analyzing the evidence, produced from both the sides has rightly come to a conclusion that waiving of the half of the Mehar amount has not been established by the petitioner-husband during trial. The trial Court further observed that it was for the petitioner to prove beyond doubt that the amount of Mehar was waived by the respondent, but he utterly failed to do so on the basis of the evidence produced, therefore, no legality in arriving at a conclusion by the revisional Court has been pointed out that the petitioner has failed to prove that the respondent has waived half of the Mehar amount. I do not find any illegality, infirmity or perversity or any error of law in the judgments passed by the Courts below. At this stage, no interference is called for in the impugned orders by this Court while exercising the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. Consequently, this miscellaneous petition stands dismissed. (Bhanwaroo Khan) J. ashok/ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR O R D E R S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Stay Application No.421/2000 IN S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.635 of 2000. Mohammed Hanif son of Shri Gulam Mohammad VERSUS Smt. Munnar Sultana daughter of Shri Shafique of Beg Date of Order :::: 17/02/2009. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Bhanwaroo Khan Mr. Abhishek Jain for Mr.G.C. Garg, Counsel for Petitioner None present for the Respondent By the Court : Consequent upon dismissal of the main petition, the stay application, filed therewith, does not survive and the same is also dismissed. Bhanwaroo Khan, J.