Vinodbhai Vlajibhai Chavda vs State Of Gujarat
2023 Latest Caselaw 7090 Guj

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 7090 Guj
Judgement Date : 26 September, 2023

Gujarat High Court

Vinodbhai Vlajibhai Chavda vs State Of Gujarat on 26 September, 2023

Bench: Sandeep N. Bhatt

                                                                                  NEUTRAL CITATION




     R/SCR.A/11431/2018                             ORDER DATED: 26/09/2023

                                                                                   undefined




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

 R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (FOR MAINTENANCE) NO. 11431
                           of 2018

==========================================================
                          VINODBHAI VLAJIBHAI CHAVDA
                                    Versus
                              STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
HCLS COMMITTEE(4998) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR NASIR SAIYED(6145) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR CHINTAN DAVE, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT

                                Date : 26/09/2023

                                 ORAL ORDER

1. This petition is filed for the following prayers:

"10(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to Admit and allow this Revision petition.

(B) Your lordships may be pleased to allow this petition by quashing and setting aside the order passed by Ld.Principal Judge, family court ahmedabad in CRMA No.326/18 at ex.7 dated 25/9/18 annexed at Annexure A of this petition.

(C) YOUR LORDSHIP MAY pending admission hearing till final disposal of this revision be pleased to stay the further implementation of the order passed by the lower court in

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/SCR.A/11431/2018 ORDER DATED: 26/09/2023

undefined

CRMA 326/2018.

(D) xxxxx"

2. Heard learned advocate Mr.Saiyed for the

petitioner and learned APP Mr.Dave for the respondent no.1-

state.

3. Learned advocate Mr.Saiyed has submitted that

the present petition is filed against the order of interim

maintenance of Rs.3500/- passed against the present

petitioner. He submitted that the present petitioner is earning

very meagre amount by running pan shop with his brother

and he has no sufficient means to pay such amount. He has

further submitted that the respondent wife is also earning

but false affidavit is filed by the wife that she is not

earning. He has further submitted that the learned trial

Court has not considered the FIR being C.R.No.II-3564 of

2018 filed against respondent no.2-wife and her family

members. He has further submitted that the respondent no.2

was not living with the family member of the petitioner but

she was living with the petitioner for three months with his

family. Considering all these aspects, he submitted that the

order passed by the learned trial Court of granting interim

maintenance of Rs.3500/- is without any basis, unjust,

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/SCR.A/11431/2018 ORDER DATED: 26/09/2023

undefined

improper and erroneous and required to be quashed and set

aside.

4. Per contra, learned APP has submitted that the learned trial Court has rightly considered all the relevant

aspects of income etc. and earning capacity of the respondent

and has come to the conclusion that the petitioner is earning

Rs.12000-15000/- per month and accordingly after considering

the same and other aspects, the Court has awarded Rs.3500/-

as the amount towards the interim maintenance, which

cannot be said to be without any basis and illegal or unjust

or improper as the respondent is legally wedded wife. He,

therefore, submitted that no interference is called for in the

impugned order and therefore this petition be dismissed.

5. I have considered rival submissions and I have

also perused the impugned order. From the impugned order,

it transpires that the learned trial Court has given a detailed

reasoning while considering the application for the interim

maintenance. As the proceeding of Section 125 of Cr.P.C. for

getting maintenance is still pending as per the averment

made by the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that any

further finding will come in the way of the present petitioner

while deciding the said application on merits by the learned

trial Court. The learned trial Court has considered the

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/SCR.A/11431/2018 ORDER DATED: 26/09/2023

undefined

provisions of Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. and also the

judgments in the case of Manharlal Mulchand Gandhi V/s

Savitaben Mulchand Gandhi and another, reported in 1993(1) GLR 579 and Amarjit Kaur V/s Harbhajan Singh reported in (2003)10 SCC 228 and other pleadings of the parties and has rightly come to the conclusion that the petitioner must be

earning about Rs.12,000/--Rs.15,000/- per month and therefore

the trial Court has awarded Rs.3,500/- towards interim

maintenance which cannot be said as exorbitant. On the

contrary, prima facie, considering the need of the wife in the

present case, it seems to be very reasonable and on the

lower side. Even otherwise, the petitioner will get opportunity

to contest at the time of considering the final amount of

maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. by leading

proper evidence to establish his income as well as the income

of the wife.

6. In view of the above, I am of the opinion that

there is no reason to interfere with the findings of the