Gujarat High Court
Upendrakumar Amrutlal Nayak vs State Of Gujarat on 29 March, 2022
Bench: B.N. Karia
R/CR.RA/222/2020 ORDER DATED: 29/03/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 222 of 2020
==========================================================
UPENDRAKUMAR AMRUTLAL NAYAK
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MAHESH BHAVSAR(1781) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
SONAL J BHAVSAR(7399) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MANSI M MULANI(9575) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR HARDIK SONI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.N. KARIA
Date : 29/03/2022
ORAL ORDER
By preferring present application, applicant has
requested to quash and set aside the judgment and order dated
26.09.2019 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Radhanpur in Criminal Misc. Application No. 89 of
2014.
Having heard learned advocate for the applicant and
considering the impugned judgment and order judgment and
order dated 26.09.2019 passed by learned Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Radhanpur in Criminal Misc. Application
No. 89 of 2014 and connected documents, this Court deems it
not fit to issue notice to the respondent.
From the facts of the case, it appears that in an
application preferred by the respondent wife under Section 12
R/CR.RA/222/2020 ORDER DATED: 29/03/2022
of the Domestic Violence Act, she has prayed to grant
maintenance of Rs. 32,000/- per month. The trial court has
awarded only Rs. 2,000/- by way of maintenance to the
respondent-wife and Rs. 1,000/- under section 19 of the Act
for residential accommodation. From the impugned order, it
appears that applicant was serving as a Conductor in the ST
Corporation, which was not contested by the present applicant
in his objections filed before the trial court. It also appears that
vide Exh. 29, salary slip of the present applicant for the month
of April 2017 was produced on record wherein his monthly
salary was Rs. 21,027/- and after deducting certain amount
from the salary, applicant was getting Rs. 8891/- net salary
per month. There was no document produced on record by the
respondent-wife that applicant had an immovable property at
Gota-Ahmedabad, Vijapur and Visnagar. At present, no copy of
the salary slip was produced on record by the applicant.
Admittedly, in the month of April 2017, monthly salary of the
applicant-husband was of Rs. 21,027/-. If any deduction was
made by the present applicant voluntarily, except the
permissible deduction that cannot be deducted by the court by
allowing the maintenance to the wife.
Granting maintenance of Rs. 2,000/- by the trial court
in favour of the respondent-wife can not be said to be illegal or
erroneous or exorbitant as very meager amount was granted
R/CR.RA/222/2020 ORDER DATED: 29/03/2022
by the court below in favour of the respondent-wife. This court
is of the view that no illegality or error was committed by the
trial court in granting maintenance of Rs. 2,000/- which is
according to this court very meager amount. Hence, this
application is hereby dismissed in limine.
(B.N. KARIA, J)
K. S. DARJI
