Himachal Pradesh High Court
Date Of Decision: 05.07.2024 vs Kubja Devi on 5 July, 2024
Author: Sandeep Sharma
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
2024:HHC:4632
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Criminal Revision No.152 of 2024
Date of Decision: 05.07.2024
.
_______________________________________________________
Sanjay Kumar
.......Petitioner
Versus
Kubja Devi
... Respondent
_______________________________________________________
Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting? 1.
For the Petitioner: Mr. Tejasvi Sharma, Advocate.
For the Respondent: None.
_______________________________________________________
Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral):
Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with order dated
10.01.2024 passed by learned Additional Principal Judge (Family
Court), Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh, whereby
learned Court below, while considering the prayer made on behalf of
the respondent for grant of ad-interim maintenance under Section 125
Cr.P.C, proceeded to award sum of Rs.7,000/- per month as interim
maintenance, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant
proceedings filed under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act,
praying therein to set-aside aforesaid order.
Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been
highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Tejasvi
.
Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner, is that learned Court
below, while ordering ad-interim maintenance, failed to take note of
the pleadings as well as other material adduced on record suggestive
of the fact that monthly income of the petitioner is Rs. 40,000/- per
month and he has other six family members to maintain.
3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the material available on record vis-à-vis reasoning assigned
in the impugned order, this Court sees no illegality or infirmity in the
same and as such, no interference is called for.
4. Needless to say, while considering prayer, if any, for
ad-interim maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C, Court is not
required to see documentary evidence, if any, adduced on record,
rather at this stage, Court is only required to see pleadings of the
party seeking such maintenance. Very purpose and object of granting
interim maintenance during the pendency of the main petition under
Section 125 Cr.P.C., is to ensure that a person seeking such
maintenance is not left to starve.
5. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court finds no
merit in the present petition and accordingly same is dismissed, as a
result thereof, order impugned in the instant proceedings is upheld,
with a direction to learned Court below to decide the main petition
filed under Section 125 Cr.P.C, expeditiously, preferably within a
.
period of two months. Needless to say, maintenance received by the
respondent as ad-interim maintenance shall be adjusted in the
amount, if any, awarded in the main petition under Section 125
Cr.P.C.
5. Learned counsel representing the petitioner undertake to
cause presence of his client before the learned Court below on
22.07.2024, enabling it to do the needful well within stipulated time.
Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(Sandeep Sharma),
Judge
July 05, 2024
(sunil)
