Jai Prakash Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 4531 Jhar

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                               Cr. Rev. No. 978 of 2018
             Jai Prakash Kumar                           ...          ... Petitioner
                                         Versus
            1. The State of Jharkhand
            2. Baby Devi                                 ...           ... Opp. Parties.
                                            ---

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

---

             For the Petitioner              : None
             For the State                   : Mrs. Vandana Bharti, APP
                                            ---

The matter was taken up through Video Conferencing. Learned counsel for the parties had no objections with it and submitted that the audio and video qualities are good.

---

06/01.12.2021: This criminal revision has been filed by the revisionist against the judgment dated 09.03.2018 passed by learned Addl. Principal Judge, Addl. Family Court, Dhanbad in Original Maintenance Case No.100 of 2017 by which application filed by Opp. Party No.2 has been allowed by directing the petitioner to give Rs.3,000/- per month to the wife and Rs.1500/- per month each to the minor children as maintenance.

It appears that the revisionist has contested the case in the court below. He has claimed that the wife is not entitled for maintenance as she has deserted matrimonial home without any reasonable excuse. Several attempts have been taken by the husband and even petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act has been filed for restitution of conjugal rights but the wife has refused to reside with the husband.

From perusal of the impugned judgment and the pleadings, it appears that the marriage is not in dispute. Husband is working in Damodar Valley Corporation, Koderma and has also landed property. The court below has taken note of the pleadings and the evidence led by both the parties and even attempt has been made for conciliation but that has filed. Considering the materials brought on record, the court below has found that the wife has reasonable reason for not staying with the husband and after assessing the capabilities of the husband, meagre amount of Rs.6000/- in total has been awarded in favour of the wife and children.

Considering the reasonable reason recorded by the court below, I am not inclined to interfere with impugned judgment.

Accordingly, it is hereby, dismissed.

Pending I.A., if any, is also dismissed.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

Ravi/-