Guddu Kumar @ Gudu Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 65 Jhar

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                  Criminal Revision No.831 of 2019
                                 ----

Guddu Kumar @ Gudu Kumar .... .... Petitioner Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand

2. Ritu Kumari .... .... Opposite Parties

----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

----

For the Petitioner : Mr. Anil Kr. Sinha, Adv. For the State : Mr. Vijay Kr. Tiwary, A.P.P. For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Gupta, Adv.

----

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.

----

th 03/Dated:06 January, 2022

1. The instant criminal revision application has been filed against the impugned judgment dated 09.04.2019 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Koderma in Original Maintenance Case No.09 of 2019 whereby and whereunder the application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the opposite party no.2, has been allowed and the revisionist has been directed to pay Rs.5,000/- per month to the opposite party no.2 as maintenance.

2. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the revisionist that the revisionist is ready and willing to keep his wife with full honour and dignity, but in spite of said fact, she does not want to reside with him and as such she is not entitled for maintenance. Further, the quantum of maintenance is also excessive as the husband works as a driver and he is not capable of giving maintenance to the wife as awarded by the court below.

3. Having heard the counsel for the revisionist and from perusal of the impugned judgment, it appears that the court below has recorded the finding that they are in matrimonial relationship since 2012 and the wife has reasonable reason for not residing with the husband as she has been tortured for non-fulfilment of the demand of dowry. So far as, the quantum of maintenance is concerned, the court below has taken into consideration the earning capacity of the husband and also other factors showing the ownership of a truck possession in the name of his father and brother and also has agricultural land. Considering the above facts, the court has decided the quantum of maintenance.

4. Considering the materials available on records and quantum of maintenance, this Court does not find any reasonable reason to interfere with the impugned judgment. Accordingly, the present criminal revision application being Criminal Revision No.831 of 2019 stands dismissed.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

Amar/-