Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Roshni vs Dr. Suresh on 28 March, 2022
Author: Anjuli Palo
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE ANJULI PALO
ON THE 28th DAY OF MARCH, 2022
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 809 of 2018
Between:-
SMT. ROSHNI W/O DR. SURESH NAGWANSHI,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSE WIFE
L.H.C. 107, JERI CHOWK, SOBHAPUR COLONY,
PATHAKHEDA, TEH. GHODADONGRI, (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI VED PRAKASH TIWARI, ADVOCATE)
AND
DR. SURESH S/O RAMPRASAD NAGWANSHI,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCCUPATION: MEDICAL OFFICER
PURENA KHALSA, TEH. JUNNARDEV, (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI VIKRAM SINGH, ADVOCATE)
This revision coming on for admission this day, however, at the request of
learned counsel for the parties, matter is heard finally at motion stage. The
court passed the following:
ORDER
This criminal revision under Section 19 of the Family Court Act
read with Section 397/401 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by
the petitioner being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 18.01.2018
passed in MJC No. 240/2016 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court,
Betul (MP) whereby the Court below has ordered to pay Rs. 8,000/- per
month (which is a meager amount) to the petitioner as maintenance amount
from the date of order i.e. 18.01.2018.
2. Admittedly, the petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the
respondent. Their marriage was solemnized on 13.05.2014 as per the Hindu
rites and rituals. After some time, dispute arose between the petitioner and
respondent. Respondent demanded dowry from the parents of the petitioner
and quarreled with the petitioner and her parents. Respondent refused to live
with the petitioner. Thereafter, petitioner gave information to Police Station
Damua. On 25.06.2016, petitioner lodged FIR against him and his family
members. Petitioner alleged that due to ill treatment by the respondent, she
resided with her parents. She has also stated that the respondent is competent
to maintain her but he refuses to do so. Thereafter, petitioner filed a petition
under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. for maintenance before the trial Court.
3. In rebuttal, the respondent denied the contentions of the
petitioner and stated that the petitioner herself did not like him. She has
lodged false report against him regarding cruelty and without any reasonable
ground she is residing separately from the respondent. Hence, petitioner is
not entitled to get any maintenance allowance.
4. Learned trial Court found that the petitioner resided separately
from the respondent. Petitioner is a house wife and has no source of income.
On the other hand, respondent having a degree in MBBS and is a registered
practitioner. As per his pay slip for the month of September 2017, his gross
salary was Rs. 52,400/- per month and after deduction, he was getting Rs.
46,836/- per month. Respondent has himself admitted that he paid Rs.
12,400/- per month as installment of his car loan and maintaining his parents,
even though, his father was working in WCL. Thus, Rs. 8,000/- per month
was fixed as maintenance allowance in favour of the petitioner.
5. The petitioner has challenged this order on the ground that the
amount is insufficient and on the lesser side. She is entitled to lead a life in
the similar manner as she would have lived in the house of her husband.
6. The Supreme Court in the case of Shamima Farooqui vs.
Shahid Khan, (2015) 5 SCC 705, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in paragraph
14 has held as under :
"14.............. As per law, she is entitled to lead a
life in the similar manner as she would have lived
in house of her husband. As that is where the
status and strata of the husband becomes a
prominent one. As long as the wife is held entitled
to grant of maintenance within the parameters of
Section 125 of the Cr.P.C., it has to be adequate so
that she can live with dignity as she would have
lived in her matrimonial home........"
7. In support his contentions, learned counsel for the petitioner has
relied upon the judgment rendered in case of Bharat Kishor Bundele vs.
Sau. Sima, Family Court Appeal No. 11/2015 (Bombay High Court),
Hemlata Chandrakar vs. Lalji Chandrakar in Criminal Misc. Petition
No. 1026/2015 (Chhattisgarh High Court), L.Priya @ Priya
Bhuvaneshwari vs. V. Ramaswamy, Crl. R.C.No. 1534/2018 (Madras
High Court), Smt. Binata Pal vs. Unknown (PP) CRR No. 4070/2016,
Bhawan Mohan Singh vs. Meena & Ors., Criminal Appeal No. 1331/2014
(Supreme Court of India).
8. The petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent
having no independent source of income. She is dependent on her parents.
Looking to the salary statement of the respondent, he earned more than Rs.
40,000/- as a medical practitioner. The salary statement Annexure A/2 was
issued on 11.09.2017. From the year 2017 till now his income would have
increased by some percentage. Hence, the burden lies on the respondent to
produce his recent slip as he is in a government job. However, the
respondent has not filed any document in this regard. On the other hand, the
petitioner had filed documents with regard to the income of the respondent
vide I.A.No. 22506/2018 to show that his salary was around 60,000/- which
was not denied by the respondent nor he had filed any document to rebutt the
same.
9. Considering the factual matrix of the case, age of the petitioner,
increasing cost of essential commodities and having regard to the income of
the respondent/husband, in the opinion of this Court, the petitioner is entitled
to get maintenance befitting the standard of living of the respondent. Hence,
the respondent/husband is directed to pay maintenance to the petitioner/wife
at the rate of Rs. 18,000/- per month from the date of filing of this criminal
revision i.e. 15.02.2018. The impugned order passed by the Principal Judge,
Family Court under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is hereby
modified to the aforesaid extent. The other findings shall remain intact.
10. With the aforesaid direction, this criminal revision stands partly
allowed and disposed of.
(Smt. Anjuli Palo)
Judge
vidya
Digitally signed by
RAJESH KUMAR JYOTISHI
Date: 2022.03.31 14:29:00
+05'30'
