‘ (B IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR [CHHATTISGARH QO @m 4 é /2006 )5 PETITIONERS 1. Smt. Madhuri Mishra W VQW/Wa 4M w I) Singig E$agh VERSUS RESPONDENTS : Rajesh Kurnar S/o Chandrika Prasad Mishra aged—38 years. Occu— Service. R/o« Janjgir, RS. and Tah. ~Janjgir Distt— Janjgir Champa. xx, PETITION UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE W/o Rajesh Kumar aged 6Q, (b %\“ 34 years. , r AK 7) 2. Harsh Kumar S/o Rajesh Kumar age— 8 gg‘iga/é’é years minor through his fgaé mother Madhuri Mishra gg I ........‘ggf‘f: W/o Rajesh Kumar both an §$ Amw‘s are resident of Janjgir P.S. and Tah. — Janjgir, Presently Resident at — Champa Distt— janjgir— Champa. w This appHcation under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been med by the applicants, being aggn'eVed hy the order dated 17.4.2006 passed hy the Addl. Sessions Judge, Janjgir in criminal revision No. 66/2005 afFIrming the the learned Chief Judieia r under Sectinn 127 (J) Cr. Shri Indrasen Sahu, c Heard on admission. mmsel for the applicants. Chief Judiéia! Magistrate, J the application of the app Cr.P.C. for enhancement o was rejected. Rriefiy stated the fa mother of‘the applicant No; Cr.P.C. filed by them, the vide order dated 15. 10. to the applicant No. l and 2 date of the order. llearne that atter a lapse of more th moved an application ”u enhancement of‘the amoun Chief Judicial Magistrate r the non-applicant J§ Rs‘ 3 failed to furnish relevant we Iaxov / n\\‘ order dated 24.2.2005 passed by the anjgir in M.J.C. No. 78/2004 whereby licants herein under Section 127 (l) Fthe amount of maintenance awarded :ts are that the applicant No. l is the 2. In an application under Section 125 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Janjgir had l ordered maintenance of Rs. 1,000/- s. 750/- to the applicant N0. 2 fi‘om the counsel for the applicants submitted n 3 years on 22.7.2004, the applicants der Section 127 (l) Cr.P.C. for of maintenance awarded. The learned corded a finding that the net income of 34/-. The applicants herein having , ocuments or to lead cogent evidence, Magistrate rejected the application .C. in criminal revision No. 66/2005. \2_ W XI—HC—78 mm..m' (“x KN {a M g3; zooé a)” mmm mW<W> WWEwW wmm mmwm émr§mm 05/09/2006 »u ‘ Priya The Add}. Sessions Judge, Janjgir agreeing with the finding recorded by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Janjgir Learned counsei i‘dr the appiicants has not been ahie to pointvout Any such il1egmity or manifest error of 1aw as would indicate that there has hben a failure ofjustice or that an order under gection 482 Cr.P‘ jumice. ; The application q merit and is dismissed in Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh ’ Judge F dismissed the criminal reyision. .C. is necessary t0 secure the ends (if nder Section 482 Cr.P.C. has thus, no limine at the stageiof‘ admissign i ‘ Sdl- l , i he! (Ki i 1« P.T.O. . i . XI—HC-78 WW,W,W . Cw NP: LAE mm m 200g z v mww 'WW(W) f i ‘ WW%WW WWW mmwm "\Q .\ %W3n%¥r