SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Kamal Khorwal vs Smt Rekha & Anr on 8 March, 2018

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 624 / 2018
Kamal Khorwal Son of Shri Om Prakash Khorwal, Aged About 29
Years, Resident Of- Bera Wala Bas, Behind Bhadwasia School,
Bhadwasiya, Jodhpur (Rajasthan)
—-Petitioner
Versus
1. Smt. Rekha D/o Shri Prabhu Ram Ji Jetaliya, By Caste Jatiya,
Resident of Bhadwasia, Jodhpur At Present Village Soyala Tehsil
Bawari Distt. Jodhpur (Raj.)

2. State of Rajasthan Through G.A.
—-Respondents
__
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.J.Gehlot.
__
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI
Judgment
08/03/2018

Heard.

This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is filed

by the petitioner being aggrieved with the order dated 20.1.2018

passed by the learned Additional Sessions (Women Atrocities

Cases), Jodhpur Metropolitan whereby, the appeal preferred by

the petitioner under Section 29 of the Protection of Women from

Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (referred to herein after as ‘the Act

of 2005’) has been dismissed. The said appeal was preferred by

the petitioner against the order dated 5.8.2017 passed by the

learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate No.3, Jodhpur

Metro (for short ‘the trial Court) on an application preferred by the

respondent no.1 Rekha under Section 23 of the Act of 2005

whereby, the trial Court has directed the petitioner to pay monthly
(2 of 3)
[CRLMP-624/2018]

maintenance to the tune of Rs.3,000/- to the respondent.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the

respondent is residing separately from the petitioner as per her

own will without there being any reasonable cause and, therefore,

she is not entitled to monthly maintenance as directed by the

Courts below. It is also contended by the learned counsel for the

petitioner that the respondent has also deserted her son who was

born only on 22.5.2015 and for this reason also, she is not

entitled for any interim maintenance. It is also contended that the

respondent is working as a teacher in a private school and,

therefore, she is earning sufficient amount to maintain herself and

for this reason also, she is not entitled for any interim

maintenance. Lastly, learned counsel for the petitioner has

contended that the trial Court has grossly erred in directing the

petitioner to pay monthly maintenance to the tune of Rs.3,000/-

from the date of application instead from the date of order. On the

strength of the above arguments, learned counsel for the

petitioner has prayed for quashing the impugned orders.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the

impugned orders.

The learned Courts below have taken into consideration the

fact that the respondent is residing separately from the petitioner

as she was subjected to cruelty and for that, she has also filed an

F.I.R. against the petitioner at the concerned police station for the

offences punishable under Sections 498A and 406 I.P.C. It is also

observed by the Courts below that there is no evidence available

on record to suggest that the respondent is working as a teacher
(3 of 3)
[CRLMP-624/2018]

in the private school or she is having sufficient means to maintain

herself. The trial Court has taken into consideration the fact that

the petitioner is working in the I.C.I.C.I. Bank and is getting

monthly salary. After taking into consideration the overall facts

and circumstances of the case, the Courts below have directed the

petitioner to pay monthly maintenance to the tune of Rs.3,000/-

to the respondent from the date of filing of the application. I don’t

find any sufficient reason to interfere in the impugned orders

passed by the Courts below. The argument of learned counsel for

the petitioner to the effect that the monthly maintenance be

ordered to be paid to the respondent from the date of order

passed by the trial Court is also bereft of any merit, hence,

rejected.

Consequently, this criminal misc. petition is dismissed. Stay

petition is also dismissed.

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J.

S.Phophaliya/-

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2018 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please CLICK HERE to read Group Rules, If You agree then JOIN HERE

We handle Women centric biased laws like False 498A, Domestic Violence(DVACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA24, 125 CrPc, 307, 313, 376, 377, 406, 420, 506, 509 etc

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh