Rajesh Choudhary vs Soni Devi
2022 Latest Caselaw 783 Jhar

                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                   Cr. Revision No. 668 of 2020
                                         ....

               Rajesh Choudhary                                 ....    Petitioner
                                         Versus
               Soni Devi                                        .... Opp. Party
                                         ....
               CORAM:         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

               For the Petitioner              : Mr. P.K.Mukhopadhyay, Adv.
               For the Opp. Party              : Mr. S.N.Roy, Adv.
                                               ....

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

....

04/02.03.2022 Heard learned counsel for the revisionist.

This revision application has been filed against the order dated 16.06.2020 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Giridih in Original Maintenance Case No.41 of 2018, whereby the petitioner has been directed to pay maintenance of Rs.6,000/- per month to O.P. No.2-the wife and further it has been ordered that Rs.2,000/- being paid in pursuance of order of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in A.B.A. No.3500 of 2016 shall be adjusted.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and from perusal of record, it appears that the marriage is not in dispute. The wife is suffering from mental ailment as alleged by the husband. The wife has alleged harassment due to non fulfillment of the demand of dowry. A criminal case has also been lodged in which the revisionist has granted anticipatory bail.

The revisionist has objected the order of maintenance stating that the revisionist is ready to keep the wife with proper care and dignity and further he earns only Rs.5,000/- per month and as such the quantum of maintenance is excessive.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the wife has supported the order of maintenance and submitted that the wife earns nothing and she has been tortured and as such she has reasonable reason for not residing with the husband.

It appears that three witnesses have been examined on behalf of the wife and three witnesses have been examined from the side of the husband. The court below after considering the material brought on record has recorded the finding that the wife has reasonable reason for not residing with the husband and she is unable to maintain herself and as such she is entitled for maintenance. So far as, quantum of maintenance is concerned, the wife has given statement that he is doing business and has other property also but no any documentary evidence has been brought on record. Considering the status of the parties, the quantum of maintenance of Rs.6,000/- per month has been awarded.

At this stage, reference is made to the judgment of Honble Apex Court reported in (2015) 5 SCC 705 in the case of Shamima Farooqui Vrs. Shahid Khan.

In view of above discussion and the reason given by the court below, this Court finds no reasonable reason to interfere with the order of the court below, accordingly, the present criminal revision is, hereby, dismissed.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.) Shahid/