SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Mohit Jain vs Sonali Jain on 10 April, 2018

1
Cr.R. No.917/2017 (Mohit Jain vs. Sonali Jain)

High Court of Madhya Pradesh: Bench at Indore
Single Bench: Hon’ble Shri Justice S.K. Awasthi

Cr.R. No.917/2017

Mohit Jain
vs
Sonali Jain

———————————————————————————
Applicant/Mohit Jain present in person.
Respondent/Sonali Jain present in person.
———————————————————————————
ORDER

(Passed on 10/04/2018)

This petition under Section 19(4) of Family Court Act read
with Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short
“The Code”) has been preferred against order dated 12/07/2016 passed
by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Indore in H.M.A. Case
No.987/2014, by which the applicant was directed to pay interim
maintenance of Rs.1000/- to respondent Sonali Jain and Rs.500/- to
Ashish Jain, son of the applicant and respondent u/S 24 of Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955 (for brevity ‘the Act’) and also the order dated
12/04/2017, passed by the Second Additional Principal Judge, Family
Court, Indore in case No.1690/2017.

2. Relevant facts, briefly stated, are that marriage between the
applicant and the respondent was solemnized on 07/05/2013 as per
hindu rites and customs. After marriage the respondent lived with the
applicant at his resident situated at Indore. Ashish Jain is the son born
out of the wedlock of the applicant and respondent. It is alleged by the
respondent that applicant subjected her to cruelty and there was
persistent demand of dowry, therefore, she was forced to leave her
2
Cr.R. No.917/2017 (Mohit Jain vs. Sonali Jain)

matrimonial house and live with her parents. Thereafter, she lodged
complaint against the applicant and his family members at Police
Station Mahila Thana, Bhopal and on the basis of that report, case
under Section 498(A), 506/34 of IPC read with Section 3/4 of Dowry
Prohibition Act 1961 was registered.

03. Vide order dated 04/09/2015, the Principal Judge, Family
Court, Bhopal directed the applicant to pay interim maintenance of
Rs.2,500/- to respondent Sonali Jain and Rs.1500/- to their son Ashish
Jain u/S 125 of ‘the Code’. The applicant filed an application under
Section 482 of Cr.P.C for quashing the F.I.R bearing crime
No.249/2014, before High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Principal Seat at
Jabalpur and the said F.I.R was quashed, vide order dated 06/02/2017,
passed in M.Cr.C. No.16651/2015. The said order was challenged
before the Hon’ble supreme Court, which came to be dismissed vide
order dated 09/05/2017 passed in SLP No.3289/2017.

04. Thereafter applicant filed an application under Section 9 of
‘the Act’ for restitution of conjugal rights, however, respondent denied
to reconciliation with the applicant. The respondent filed an
application under Section 24 of C.P.C before this Court for transfer of
the case from Indore to Bhopal, however the same was dismissed vide
order dated 11/01/2016. Respondent filed an application under
Section 24 of ‘the Act’ for claiming interim maintenance from the
applicant before the Second Additional Principal Judge, Family Court,
Indore the said application was allowed and the applicant was directed
to pay maintenance of Rs.1000/- to respondent Sonali Jain and
Rs.500/- to their son Ashish Jain vide order dated 12/07/2016, which
is the subject matter of challenge.

05. Applicant has submitted that the respondent is a very
qualified woman and before marriage, she was in service, whereas the
3
Cr.R. No.917/2017 (Mohit Jain vs. Sonali Jain)

applicant is in private job and getting salary of Rs.6,500/- per month.
It is further submitted that respondent Sonali Jain and son Ashish Jain
are already getting Rs.4000/- as interim maintenance in the
proceedings pending under Section 125 of ‘the Code’ and he is also
directed to pay Rs.1500/- to the respondents for interim maintenance
under Section 24 of ‘the Act’, therefore, it is prayed that the interim
maintenance under Section 24 of ‘the Act’ may be set off with interim
maintenance of Rs.4000/- per month granted under Section 125 of ‘the
Code’, by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhopal vide
its order dated 04/09/2015.

06. Per contra, respondent opposed the prayer submitting that
the Courts below, on proper evaluation, have rightly passed the
impugned orders and prayed for rejection of this revision petition.

07. Heard both the parties and perused the record.

08. From the perusal of record, it is clear that respondent/wife
has made an application under Section 125 of ‘the Code’ for getting
maintenance from the applicant and the aforesaid application is
pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhopal in which,
by the order dated 04/09/2015 it was directed that the applicant to pay
Rs.2500/- per month to respondent/wife and Rs.1500/- per month to
her son Ashish Jain, total Rs.4000/- as interim maintenance from
19/11/2014, till the decision of the case.

09. Hon’ble apex Court in the case of Sudeep Choudhary vs.
Radha Choudhary, (1997)11 SCC 286, held that the amount awarded
under Section 125 of Cr.P.C for maintenance is adjustable against the
amount awarded in matrimonial proceedings and is not to be given
over and above the same.

10. Looking to the aforesaid legal position this Court is of the
considered opinion that the amount paid by the applicant/husband to
4
Cr.R. No.917/2017 (Mohit Jain vs. Sonali Jain)

respondent/wife as interim maintenance in pursuance of the order
dated 12/07/2016 passed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family
Court, Indore under Section 24 of ‘the Act’ is adjustable against
amount payable under Section 125 of ‘the Code’ towards their
maintenance in pursuance of the order dated 04/09/2015 passed by the
Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhopal.

11. In the back drop of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of
the case, this petition is allowed and the impugned order dated
12/04/2017 passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge is hereby set
aside and the trial Court is directed to adjust the amount of interim
maintenance awarded to the respondents in pursuance of the order
dated 12/07/2016 with the amount awarded under Section 125 of ‘the
Code’ vide order dated 04/09/2015 passed by the Principal Judge,
Family Court, Bhopal. This order will be subject to such orders as
may be passed at the stage of final disposal of matrimonial
proceedings.

No order as to costs.

Certified copy as per rules.

(S.K. Awasthi)
Judge

sumathi

Digitally signed by Sumati Jagadeesan
Date: 2018.04.10 14:39:35 +05’30’

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 to read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registrationJOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women centric biased laws like False 498A, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307,312, 313,323 376, 377, 406, 420, 506, 509; and also TEP, RTI etc

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh