Rajesh @ Rajpal Rawat vs Smt. Mithlesh Rawat
2022 Latest Caselaw 2067 MP

                          1
          THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                      MCRC No.54071/2021
         Rajesh @ Rajpal Rawat vs. Smt.Mithilesh Rawat

Gwalior, Dated : 15/02/2022

      Shri Ashirbad Dwivedi, Counsel for the applicant.

      Shri O.P. Meena, Counsel for respondent.

This application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed

against the order dated 5.10.2021 passed by 2 nd Additional Sessions

Judge, Sabalgarh, District Morena in Criminal Revision No.52/2018

by which the order dated 12.2.2020 passed by JMFC, Sabalgarh,

District Morena in Criminal Case No.19/2015 has been affirmed, by

which maintenance @ Rs.10,000/- has been fixed.

2. Challenging the order passed by the Courts below, it is

submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the respondent is

residing separately without any reasonable reason. The applicant has

to look after his old and ailing parents and, therefore, he is not in a

position to pay the maintenance amount @ Rs.10,000/- per month. At

the time of marriage, the applicant and the respondent were minor and

the marriage was performed without the consent of the parties and the

marriage was never consummated.

3. Per contra, the application is vehemently opposed by the

counsel for the respondent. It is submitted that both the Courts below

have given a concurrent finding of fact that the respondent is not

residing separately without any reasonable reason. In fact the

applicant has performed second marriage and in cross-examination it

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No.54071/2021 Rajesh @ Rajpal Rawat vs. Smt.Mithilesh Rawat

has been admitted by the applicant that he is facing trial for offence

under Section 494 of IPC.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

5. The Trial Court in paragraph 13 of its judgment has specifically

given a finding that the applicant has admitted that on the report of the

respondent he is facing trial for committing an offence of bigamy.

Once the applicant has contracted second marriage or is involved in

bigamy, then the respondent has reasonable reason to live separately.

Furthermore, both the Courts below have given a concurrent finding

of fact that the respondent is living separately because of reasonable

reasons.

6. So far as the quantum of maintenance is concerned, the

applicant is undisputedly working on the post of Teacher. The

evidence of the applicant was recorded before the 7 th Pay Commission

came in force and at that time he was getting monthly salary of

Rs.26,000/-. Thus, it is clear that there was hike in the salary of the

applicant after the benefit of 7 th Pay Commission is given. Further, the

applicant has a plot in Sabalgarh and he has three Beegha of

agricultural land. It is well established principle of law that a wife is

entitled to live the life which she would have enjoyed in her

matrimonial house. Where the applicant is having a plot, three Beegha

of agricultural land and is a Government teacher, then by no stretch of

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No.54071/2021 Rajesh @ Rajpal Rawat vs. Smt.Mithilesh Rawat

imagination it can be said that an amount of Rs.10,000/- per month

awarded by the Courts below is on a higher side. Even otherwise,

looking to the price index and the cost of the essential commodities

for bare survival of the respondent, the monthly maintenance of

Rs.10,000/- cannot be said to be disproportionate.

7. Accordingly, the application fails and is hereby dismissed.

(G.S. Ahluwalia) Judge (alok)

ALOK KUMAR 2022.02.18 16:20:10 +05'30'