Baladeen Kushwaha and another Vs The State of M.P.
Bench: Single Bench
Result Published
Acts Referenced
Judgement Snapshot
Case Number
335 of 2016
Hon'ble Bench
S K Awasthi
Advocates
Pawan Singh Raghuvanshi, Brijesh Tyagi
Final Decision
Disposed Of
Acts Referred
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 125 - Order for maintenance of wives, children and parents
- Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 498A, Section 49
Judgement Text
Translate:
1. The applicant is calling in question the order dated 19.02.2016 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Vidisha, in M.J.C.No.91/2015, whereby the interim maintenance has been allowed to the non-applicants No.1 & 2 Rs.7000/- & Rs.3000/- per month respectively.
2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the non-applicant/respondent has filed an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. against the applicant alleging that the applicant was harassing his wife/non-applicant No.1 for demand of dowry. The behaviour of the applicant was cruel to the non-applicant No.1 and under compelling circumstances, she was forced to live in her parental house. After that the applicant has solemnized second marriage. A criminal case against the applicant and his family member was registered under Sections 498A & 494 of IPC. The non-applicant No.1 has pleaded that she is unable to maintain herself as she does not have any source of income and she is depending on her old aged parents. Accordingly, a prayer was made against the applicant in the application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. . On the contrary the applicant contended that the non-applicant no.1 is living separately without any reason. She is having sufficient source of income to maintain herself whereas the applicant is in possession of 7 Bighas of agricultural land which is only the source of his income, therefore, he has no sufficient source of income.
3. After hearing both the parties, the court below partly allowed the application and has directed that the applicant shall pay the maintenance amount to the non-applicants/respondents to the tune of Rs.10,000/- by way of interim maintenance. Being aggrieved of this order, the revision petition has been filed by the applicant.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the reasons assigned by the trial Court are fictitious and contrary to the record. The applicant is working as Gram Rojgar Sahayak on contract basis and earning only Rs.3200/- per month. Apart from it, he is in possession of 7 Bighas of the agricultural land and therefore taking into account source of his earning the interim maintenance has been fixed on the very higher side.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the applicant/husband is a Govt. employee and earning Rs.20,000/- per month as salary. Therefore, the court below is justified in passing the impugned order.
6. I have considered the rival contentions and perused the order of the court below.
7. Undisputedly, non-applicant No.1 is legally wedded wife of the applicant and the non-applicant No.2 is his daughter. Non-applicant No.1 is residing separately with the applicant and the applicant does not make any arrangement for their livelihood.
8. Non-applicant claims that she has no source of income and she is unable to maintain herself and the applicant No.2 whereas the applicant stated that the non- applicant is living separately without any reasonable cause. Non-applicant No.1 submits that the applicant and his family members used to harass her for demand of dowry. In this context, the applicant has not denied that a criminal case under Sections 498-A and 494 of IPC is pending against him on the basis of the report lodged by the non-applicant No.1. Therefore, submission of the applicant is not acceptable that the non-applicant No.1 is living separately without any reasonable cause.
9. In view of the statement of the non-applicant that she is living separately, the applicant who is the husband of the non-applicant No.1 and the father of the applicant No.2, is duty bound to make arrangement for the maintenance of the non-applicants. The applicant admitted in the revision petition that he is working as Gram Rojgar Sahayak on contract basis and his pay scale is Rs.3200/- per month but he has not produced his pay- slip. In this respect, he has filed a contract deed which was executed on 29.09.2012. This agreement was only for one year and thereafter, new contract has been executed but the applicant has not filed copy of that agreement. He has also admitted that he is having 7 Bighas of agricultural land which indicates that the applicant has sufficient source of income.
10. The facts and the circumstances of the case make it advertently clear that the applicant is earning around Rs.15,000/- per month. Therefore, he is capable to pay Rs.4,000/- to the non-applicant no.1 and Rs.2,000/- per month to the non-applicant No.2 as interim maintenance.
11. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the revision petition filed by the applicant is hereby partly allowed and it is directed that the order of the trial Court dated 19.02.2016 is modified to the extent that he shall pay Rs.4,000/- per month as interim maintenance to the non-applicant No.1 and Rs.2,000/- per month to the non-applicant No.2 from the date of the order of Family Court, Vidisha.
12. With the aforesaid modification, this revision petition is disposed of.
