Sunday, 17, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Hiteshbhai Mansukhbhai Dedakiya vs Hemaliben Hiteshbhai Dedakiya
2022 Latest Caselaw 9173 Guj

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 9173 Guj
Judgement Date : 17 October, 2022

Gujarat High Court
Hiteshbhai Mansukhbhai Dedakiya vs Hemaliben Hiteshbhai Dedakiya on 17 October, 2022
Bench: Samir J. Dave
     R/CR.RA/1135/2022                           ORDER DATED: 17/10/2022




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

          R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 1135 of 2022

==========================================================
                     HITESHBHAI MANSUKHBHAI DEDAKIYA
                                  Versus
                      HEMALIBEN HITESHBHAI DEDAKIYA
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR SHRIKAR H BHATT(2573) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR RC KODEKAR, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMIR J. DAVE

                             Date : 17/10/2022

                               ORAL ORDER

1. By way of present application, applicants have requested to quash and set aside the judgment and order dated 05.09.2022 passed by learned 10th Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot in Criminal Appeal No. 111 of 2019 as well as judgment and order dated 19.03.2019 passed by learned 2 nd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajkot in Criminal Misc. Application No. 271 of 2017.

2. Brief facts of the present case are as under:

3. The marriage of the applicant no.1 and respondent no.1 was solemnized on 28.04.2009 and during their wedlock one boy child Haard was born in the year 2012. Thereafter, due to matrimonial dispute, respondent no.1 left her matrimonial

R/CR.RA/1135/2022 ORDER DATED: 17/10/2022

home and filed Criminal Misc. Application No. 1136 of 2016 before the learned Family Court, Rajkot and vide order dated 28.05.2019, maintenance was granted to the tune of Rs. 3500/- per month to the respondent no.1. Thereafter, respondent no.1 filed Criminal Misc. Application No. 271 of 2017 under Section 12 of the DV Act before the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajkot wherein vide order dated 19.03.2019, applicant was ordered to pay Rs. 2000/- towards rent to the wife-respondent no.1 herein as well as Rs. 6,000/- per month towards the maintenance and being aggrieved by the said order, applicant approached the learned appellate court by way of Criminal Appeal No. 111 of 2019 wherein vide order dated 05.09.2022, the maintenance amount was reduced from Rs. 6,000/- to Rs. 3,000/- but the order of paying rent per month was confirmed. Thus, being aggrieved by the same, applicant has approached this court by way of this application.

4. Heard learned advocate for the applicants.

5. It was submitted by learned advocate for the applicants that the impugned orders are erroneous, illegal, contrary to facts and law because the respondent no.1 has suppressed the facts before the court below. That the learned appellate court has not considered that the respondent no.1 has left her son at

R/CR.RA/1135/2022 ORDER DATED: 17/10/2022

the house of the applicant no.1 from 2017 and not demanded any type of custody for he son. That learned Appellate court has overlooked the fact that the applicant no.1 is performing the duty of the respondent no.1 for the minor child Haard. That learned appellate court has overlooked the deposition of the respondent no.1 that she is doing job in Marvell school, sheri no.1 and getting salary of Rs. 5,000/- per month. That, as the respondent no.1 is earning, the order of paying rent to the respondent no.1 may be quashed and set aside. He has further submitted that the applicant is rendering his liability of his minor son and parents and other family also. Ultimately, it was submitted by learned advocate for the applicant to allow present application.

6. Heard learned advocate for the applicants and perused the documents produced on record. Before concluding the matter, it is required to be noted that the purpose and object of Section 125 Cr.P.C. is to provide immediate relief to an applicant. An application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. is predicated on two conditions : (1) the husband has sufficient means; and (2) "neglects" to maintain his wife, who is unable to maintain herself. In such a case, the husband may be directed by the Magistrate to pay such monthly sum to the wife, as deemed fit. Maintenance is awarded on the basis of the

R/CR.RA/1135/2022 ORDER DATED: 17/10/2022

financial capacity of the husband and other relevant factors. Under sub-section (2) of Section 125, the Court is conferred with the discretion to award payment of maintenance either from the date of the order, or from the date of the application. Under the third proviso to the amended Section 125, the application for grant of interim maintenance must be disposed of as far as possible within sixty days' from the date of service of notice on the respondent.

7. While deciding the appeal, learned Appellate court has observed that the learned trial court has committed error in deciding the income of the applicant and therefore, reduced the maintenance amount granted by the learned trial court. Thus, so far as the maintenance amount granted to the respondent no.1 is concerned, no interference is required by this court on this issue because the law is clear that husband is bound to maintain his wife and minor children.

8. The term 'maintenance' has been generally interpreted to include food, clothing and lodging. However in recent time it has been held that any other requirements, i.e., necessary for a person to remain fit healthy and alive is also to be included within periphery of the term 'maintenance'.

9. So far as order of paying monthly rent of RS. 2000/- to the respondent no.1 passed by the learned trial court and

R/CR.RA/1135/2022 ORDER DATED: 17/10/2022

confirmed by the learned Appellate court is concerned, both the courts have not committed any error in passing and confirming the order thereof respectively.

10. Thus, while considering aforesaid discussion, this court deems it not fit to accept the prayer of the applicant and accordingly, present application stands rejected at the stage of admission without issuing notice to the otherside.

11. Applicant no.1 is directed to pay the maintenance amount as ordered regularly per month to the respondent no.1 and shall clear the arrears amount of maintenance if any within 6 months from today.

(SAMIR J. DAVE,J) K. S. DARJI

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter