SAHIB SINGH vs MANJEET KAUR AND OTHERS — CRR(F)/426/2022

Case under No Acts Defined Section 1. Disposed: --DISMISSED on 11th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010418502022

Filing Number

CRR(F)/25071/2022

Filing Date

21-Apr-2022

Registration No

CRR(F)/426/2022

Registration Date

11-May-2022

Judge

Ms. Justice Kirti Singh

Coram

Ms. Justice Kirti Singh

Bench Type

Single

Category

37.16 - CRL.REV. AGAINST ORD. OF FAMILY COURT. U/S 125 ( 280 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

11-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISMISSED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

No Acts Defined Section 1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SAHIB SINGH

    Adv. DEEPAK KUMAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.MANJEET KAUR AND OTHERS

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-May-2026

    Ms. Justice Kirti SinghView PDF

    The High Court of Punjab & Haryana dismissed Sahib Singh's revision petition challenging the Family Court's order awarding Rs. 14,000/- monthly maintenance to his wife (Manjeet Kaur) under Section 125 Cr.P.C. The Court upheld the lower court's decision, finding that the petitioner had admitted to earning Rs. 61,000/- monthly, the wife had no independent means to support herself and their two children, and there was no cogent evidence of the alleged illicit relations claimed by the petitioner. The Court affirmed that maintenance provisions serve social justice purposes and prevent destitution. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 21-Apr-2022

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRR(F)/426/2022

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Punjab & Haryana dismissed Sahib Singh's revision petition challenging the Family Court's order awarding Rs. 14,000/- monthly maintenance to his wife (Manjeet Kaur) under Section 125 Cr.P.C. The Court upheld the lower court's decision, finding that the petitioner had admitted to earning Rs. 61,000/- monthly, the wife had no independent means to support herself and their two children, and there was no cogent evidence of the alleged illicit relations claimed by the petitioner. The Court affirmed that maintenance provisions serve social justice purposes and prevent destitution. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case