Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

january 2025

Delhi High Court · 2025-01-30

SMT. REKHA DEVI vs MR. NIRVESH KUMAR

Citation / case number
CRL.REV.P.-220/2023 2025:DHC:740
Court
Delhi High Court
Petitioner
SMT. REKHA DEVI
Respondent
MR. NIRVESH KUMAR

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of order: 30th January, 2025 + CRL.REV.P. 220/2023 & Crl.M.A.31641/2024 SMT. REKHA DEVI .....Revisionist Through: Mr. M. Hasibuddin, Advocate versus MR. NIRVESH KUMAR .....Respondent Through: Mr. Mandeep Baisla, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH ORDER CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J (Oral) 1. The instant revision petition has been filed on behalf of the revisionist under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter “Cr.P.C.”) challenging the impugned judgment dated 24 th January, 2023 passed by learned Principal Judge (North), Family Court, Rohini Courts, New Delhi in M.T. No. 390/2018 whereby the petition under Section 127 of the Cr.P.C. seeking alteration and modification of the order dated 24th August, 2016 passed by the learned Family Court in M.T. No. 332/2015 has been dismissed. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the revisionist got married to the respondent on 19th April, 1995 and out of the said wedlock, two children namely, Nitin and Sumit, were born on 25th March, 1999 and 21st August, Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CRL.REV.P. 220/2023 Page 1 of 9 By:GAURAV SHARMA Signing Date:07.02.2025 18:08:19 2000, respectively. Due to some personal issues, the respondent abandoned the company of the revisionist and deserted her in November, 2014. 3. Consequently, the revisionist started facing financial hardship in her life and being unable to maintain herself, she along with her sons filed a petition under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. against the respondent claiming maintenance for themselves and vide order dated 24 th August, 2016, the said petition was disposed off after recording the compromise statement of the parties, directing the respondent to pay a

SMT. REKHA DEVI vs MR. NIRVESH KUMAR · Niyam