HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR
SINGLE BENCH : HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE V.P.S.CHAUHAN
Dr.(Smt.) Priya Ahirwar
V E R S U S
Shri Ajay Pal Singh and Shri Sanjay Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Ajay Gupta, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent.
O R D E R
The applicants have filed this revision under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.c. being aggrieved by the order dated 26/10/2018 passed in M.J.C. No.267/2017 by 2nd Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhopal thereby directing the respondent to pay pendent lit maintenance to the applicant to the tune of Rs.10,000/- per month, therefore, the applicant is seeking enhancement of the said amount.
2. The facts giving rise to this revision, in short, are that the applicant is legally wedded wife of respondent. After marriage she went to her matrimonial house. After some time, relation of both became strained. So many criminal proceedings and civil proceedings instituted by both of them against each other and ultimately applicant filed an application on 10/1/2017 under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. before the Family Court. The Family Court vide impugned order dated 26/10/2018 granted the maintenance allowance to the applicant to the tune of Rs.10,000/- per month.
3. The applicant being dissatisfying with this maintenance amount has filed this criminal revision under Section 397/401 of Cr.P.C. on the ground that the respondent is getting a handsome salary of Rs.70,000/- per month and the applicant is not having any permanent means of earning. The respondent is not maintaining his wife i.e. applicant. Learned trial Court fixed a meager amount of maintenance in spite of the fact that the respondent is not having any liability of maintenance except his wife i.e. applicant. Rs.10,000/- per month as maintenance is insufficient to maintain the applicant herself, thus, the applicant is seeking enhancement from Rs.10,000/- to Rs.30,000/- per month from the respondent.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the applicant is a Dentist doctor having a professional degree to earn money for maintaining herself. She is living separately from the applicant without any sufficient cause. There is sufficient amount of Rs.10,000/- per month to meet out the basic need in the present situation. She is a registered Dentist doing private practice. She was posted in the Dental College having lot of experience of the profession, her registration number is A4372.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused MJC No.267/2017.
6. Both the parties adduced evidence before the Family Court. Perused. It is undisputed that the applicant married with the respondent on 13th May, 2014. The applicant stated before the Family Court that after her marriage her husband and in-laws demanded dowry and harassed her physically and mentally for non-fulfilment of dowry. She filed a complaint for demanding of dowry as well as domestic violence against the respondent and in-laws. She also stated that the respondent filed a complaint against her. She also filed a complaint before Rajya Mahila Aayog and also before State Human Right Commission as also Inspector General of Police, Rewa. In her statement in para-4 she admitted that on 20/2/2017 her husband filed a petition seeking divorce against her. She also admitted that she did BDS graduation, but, she has no source of income and depended upon her mother and father. Her father is a pensioner. Respondent is getting Rs.70,000/- per month. He is posted as SDO in the Forest Department, presently posted in Raghogarh, Guna. In para-12 she admitted that before marriage she was having a knowledge that respondent belongs to village culture but educated person. In para-16 she also admitted that BDS is a professional degree and she registered as a private doctor for doing practice. Her registration number is A4372. She also admitted that on 3/12/2016 she was having Rs.2,42,817/- in her account and also purchased a smart phone worth Rs.18,429/- on 5/7/2017 and latest device of Rs.15,300/-. In her statement, she also admitted that on 13/07/2017 she deposited Rs.35,000/- in her account and also admitted that she has deposited the amount of Rs.20,054/- to Patwa City, Indore.
7. Considered the submissions of the applicant. On the one hand she stated that her father is pensioner, she is living with her father and mother not having any means of earning, however, on the other hand, she admitted that in her account Rs.2,42,817/- is balance, purchased costly electronic gadgets and mobile phone
8. Respondent examined himself before the Family Court. Perused his statement. In his statement, the respondent in para-2 stated that after marriage when the applicant came in the matrimonial house i.e. in Village, no proper electricity supply was there, the applicant told that she could not live in the matrimonial house and she will live in Bhopal because she is a Dentist doctor and teaching in Mansarovar Dental College and practicing in Bhopal. After five days of marriage, she started ill-treating and demanded luxurious items and told that she could not adjust in the matrimonial house. After training when respondent posted at Satna, then applicant resided with him and pressurized the respondent to get separate from his parents. Ultimately she started disturbing his life. She lodged false report against the respondent and his mother, father. When the applicant denied to live with him, the respondent filed a divorce petition which is pending before the Family Court, Bhopal. The applicant lodged a false report of demand of dowry against the respondent and his parents after filing the divorce petition.
9. After perusal of the statement of both the parties, this Court is of the view that the applicant is having a professional degree i.e. Dentist and registered as a Dentist doctor and the respondent is of a village status. Learned Family Court awarded Rs.10,000/- per month as maintenance to the applicant. It is undisputed that the respondent is working as an Assistant Conservator of Forest getting salary, it does not mean that under Section 125 of Cr.P..C., half of salary should be given to wife when she is living separately with her parents. Now doubt the status of the parties should be maintained and looking to the status, the Court can award the maintenance allowance. However, in the present case this Court prima facie found that the applicant is a stubborn, separately living with her mother and father. Maintenance allowance is not a means for permanent income to lead luxurious life on the basis of maintenance allowance. It is meant to be meet out the basic requirement of a wife.
10. Learned counsel for the applicant placed reliance on the decisions of this Court in the cases of Saroj Bai (Smt.) Vs. Jai Kumar Jain, 1994 JLJ 725, Manju Raghuvanshi Vs. Dilip Singh Raghuvanshi, 2007 (1) MPHT 438, Mamta W/o Rajesh Jayaswal Vs. Rajesh S/o Shyamsunderji Jayaswal, 2000(3) MPLJ 100. However, on perusal of these case laws, it emerges out that the same are on different footting to the present case.
11. On the basis of forgoing discussions, this Court is of the view that the Family Court has properly awarded Rs.10,000/- per month as maintenance allowance to the applicant which is sufficient to meet out the basic requirement of the applicant.
12. Accordingly, the revision is devoid of any merit and the same is hereby dismissed without any order as to cost.
(Vishnu Pratap Singh Chauhan)