SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Suresh Kumar vs State & Anr on 3 April, 2018

S.B. Criminal Revision No. 1394 / 2017
Suresh Kumar S/o Shri Chhitarram, Aged About 56 Years, By
Caste Bairwa, Resident of Adarsh Nagar, Marwar Junction, District
Pali (Raj.)


1. State of Rajasthan

2. Smt. Kalawati Devi W/o Suresh Kumar, Aged About 45 Years,
Resident of 148, Sarvoday Nagar, District Pali (Raj.)

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Khet Singh
For Respondent No.1 : Mr. L.R. Upadhyay, P.P., for the State
For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Bhagat Dadhich

By the instant revision petition under Section 19(4) of the

Family Courts Act, 1984 read with Section 397/401 Cr.P.C.,

petitioner has challenged order dated 23.10.2017 passed by

Family Court, Pali (for short, ‘learned Court below’). Learned

Court below, by the order impugned, partly allowed application of

the respondent-wife under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and awarded

maintenance to the tune of Rs.4,000/- per month.

The facts, in brief, giving rise to this petition are that

petitioner and second respondent entered into Nata marriage but

after some time second respondent-wife was allegedly neglected

by petitioner and that forced her to leave the matrimonial home.

Subsequently, at her behest, an FIR was lodged against the
(2 of 3)

petitioner and thereupon, petitioner is charge-sheeted for offence

under Sections 498A, 406 and 323 IPC. Living in destitution,

second respondent applied for maintenance before the learned

Court below. In the application, it is, inter-alia, averred that

petitioner is serving as Gram Sewak and earning approximately

Rs.34,686/- as monthly salary but not paying anything to her

towards maintenance. It is stated that though she is getting ex-

gratia pension being a widow but that amount too is inadequate

and, therefore, she is unable to maintain herself. Learned trial

Court, thereafter, recorded evidence of rival parties and by the

impugned order moderately assessed maintenance amount to the

tune of Rs.4,000/- per month.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

counsel for the respondent, perused impugned order and also

examined the materials available on record including the

statements recorded.

Upon examining the matter threadbare, in my opinion,

indisputably, there was relationship between petitioner and second

respondent akin to that of a husband and wife and from the

evidence it has come to the fore that she is unable to maintain

herself. The provision contained under Section 125 Cr.P.C.

envisages that the term ‘wife’ is to be construed broadly and

expansively and the provision being a measure of social justice is

required to be extended to protect women and children with the

solemn object to prevent vagrancy and destitution. Learned Court

below, in the impugned order, has taken note of all these aspects

and has assessed a very moderate amount of maintenance, which
(3 of 3)

in the facts and circumstances of the case, looking to the monthly

earnings of petitioner, can not be categorized as excessive or

exorbitant by any stretch of imagination.

In view thereof, no case for interference in exercise of

revisional jurisdiction is required. Consequently, revision petition

fails and the same is hereby rejected.



Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2021 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 read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation