Ritesh Sharma vs Dolly Sharma
2022 Latest Caselaw 7525 Chatt

                                    1

                                                                 NAFR
            HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                  Criminal Revision No.1233 of 2022
     1.

Ritesh Sharma S/o Devendra Sharma Aged About 45 Years R/o Near Shri Ram Kirana Stores, Post Office S. E. C. L. Sarkanda, Police Station Sarkanda, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

2. Devendra Sharma S/o Bihari Aged About 68 Years R/o Near Shri Ram Kirana Stores, Post Office S. E. C. L. Sarkanda, Police Station Sarkanda, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

3. Sheela Sharma W/o Devendra Sharma Aged About 65 Years R/ o Near Shri Ram Kirana Stores, Post Office S. E. C. L. Sarkanda, Police Station Sarkanda, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh --- Applicants Versus Dolly Sharma W/o Ritesh Sharma Aged About 30 Years R/o Goushala, Police Line, Raigarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

---Non-Applicant

For Applicants: Shri Aman Sharma, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Order on Board 13.12.2022

1. This Revision has been filed challenging the judgment dated

21.10.2022 passed by the Special Judge (Atrocities Act) and

Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), District Raigarh in Criminal Appeal

No.62/2021 whereby, maintenance to the tune of Rs.3,000/- per

month has been awarded to the Non-Applicant/wife under Section 23

of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for

short 'the Act of 2005').

2. Shri Sharma, learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that it is

not disputed that Applicant No.1 and Non-Applicant are husband and

wife whose marriage was solemnized on 23.11.2017 and Applicants

No.2 & 3 are father-in-law and mother-in-law of the Non-Applicant.

He further submits that Non-Applicant/wife had earlier filed a Petition

under Section 125 Cr.P.C, which has been registered by the Family

Court, Raigarh as Case No.35/2020 in which, by order dated

13.07.2021, interim maintenance to the tune of Rs.3,000/- has

already been awarded to her. He further submits that Non-Applicant/

wife has filed an application under Section 23 of the Act of 2005,

which has been dismissed by the JMFC, Raigarh in MJC (Criminal)

No.93/2020 against which, she had preferred an Appeal under

Section 29 of the Act of 2005 and by the impugned judgment, the

same has been allowed and interim maintenance to the tune of

Rs.3,000/- was ordered to be paid by Applicant No.1 the the Non-

Applicant/wife with effect from 01.07.2022. He further submits that in

the matter of Rajnesh vs. Neha and Another reported in (2021) 2

SCC 324, it has been held that it is the legal obligation on the part of

the Non-Applicant/wife to disclose in her application regarding the

maintenance awarded in her favour under Section 125 Cr.P.C, which

has been not been fulfilled in the instant case and the material facts

have been suppressed to this effect and therefore, the order

impugned granting the interim maintenance is unjust and contrary to

the record and is accordingly liable to be quashed.

3. Heard learned Counsel for the Applicants and perused the

documents annexed with the Revision carefully.

4. In the impugned judgment, though learned Court below has

taken into consideration that the interim maintenance has been

granted to the Non-Applicant/wife under Section 125 Cr.P.C by the

Family Court, Raigarh in Case No.35/2020 vide order dated

13.07.2021 but in the said order, no such fact has come up that the

income of Applicant No.1 has increased within a year, therefore, the

interim maintenance in addition to the amount already granted in

favour of the Non-Applicant/wife ought to have been enhanced. As

the Court has fixed the interim maintenance which has already been

awarded in the case of Rajnesh vs. Neha and Another (supra),

therefore, the said fact is required to be taken for material

consideration for passing of any order.

5. The contention of learned Counsel for the Applicants that the

maintenance amount granted to the Non-Applicant/wife has to be

doubled to that of the amount granted by the Family Court appears to

be unreasonable, therefore, this Court finds it appropriate to grant an

additional amount of maintenance to the tune of Rs.1,000/- per month

to the Non-Applicant/wife under the Act of 2005 apart from the

amount of Rs.3,000/- which has already been awarded to her under

Section 125 Cr.P.C.

6. Accordingly, it is directed that Applicant No.1 shall pay the

enhanced amount of Rs.1,000/- to the wife with effect from

01.07.2022 in addition to the maintenance amount of Rs.3,000/-

already awarded by the Court below and thereby shall pay Rs.4,000/-

as a whole every month.

7. With the aforesaid modification, the Petition is disposed of and

the impugned judgment is set aside to the extent indicated above.

8. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned Court for

necessary compliance.

Sd/-

(Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge Priya