Anshulraj vs Smt. Manisha
2023 Latest Caselaw 3625 MP

                                           1

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                     AT GWALIOR
                         BEFORE
      HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL
                ON THE 1st OF MARCH, 2023
            CRIMINAL REVISION No. 2430 of 2022


       BETWEEN:-

       ANSHULRAJ S/O LT RAJENDRA
       MOHAN    CHAUDHARY,    AGED
       ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
       GOVT SERVANT 103 RENUKA
       PLAZA PANDNEKAR NURSINGH
       HOME KE PAAS FREEGANJ UJJAIN
       (MADHYA PRADESH)



                                                                 ........PETITIONER
       (BY SHRI PRASHANT SHARMA- ADVOCATE)

       AND

       SMT.  MANISHA   W/O    ANSHULRAJ
       CHAUDHARY, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
       NARMADA COLONY GNADHI ROAD
       MURAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                                               ........RESPONDENT

       (BY SHRI AWADHESH PRATAP SINGH SISODIYA-ADVOCATE)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       This appeal coming on for final hearing this day, the Court
passed the following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       ORDER

The petitioner has filed this criminal revision under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 being

aggrieved by the order dated 20.04.2022 passed in Cr.A. No. 129/2022 by Sixth Additional Sessions Judge Gwalior District Gwalior dismissing the appeal preferred by the petitioner affirming the judgment dated 28.01.2017 passed by Second Additional Judge to First Additional Sessions Judge Gwalior in Cr.A. No.6400324/2016 and the order dated 28.01.2017 whereby a recovery warrant has been directed to be issued against the revision petitioner husband for recovery of Rs. 3,90,500/- due to respondent-wife from the revision petitioner husband by way of arrears of maintenance allowance.

This Court in connected M.Cr.C. No. 40233/2022 has already affirmed the order dated 28.01.2017 passed by Second Additional Judge to First Additional Sessions Judge Gwalior in Cr.A. No.6400324/2016.

So far as prayer for setting aside the order dated 02.12.2021 is concerned, the ground taken in this revision by the petitioner is earning Rs.20,000/- per month. This Court is of the view that this is not a ground to relax the petitioner for paying the remaining monthly maintenance allowance especially when the respondent-wife is living separately. If the petitioner paid the amount in time, he would have not faced such type of problem.

Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the marriage between the petitioner and respondent has been dissolved by the Competent Court. This Court is of the view that this is not the reasons to stop the maintenance allowance. After divorce, the lady is entitled to receive the maintenance till she marry again. In this revision, this Court does not find any merits to provide any lenient view in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner is legally duty bound to pay the remaining arrears of the maintenance to the respondent.

Learned counsel appeared on behalf of the respondent submits that

since 2017, the petitioner is not paying the maintenance to the respondent. He intentionally avoiding for payment of monthly maintenance allowance. He is misusing the process of law and avoiding the order passed by the Competent Court. He, therefore, prays for dismissal of this revision.

The Hon'ble Apex Court in Para 30 of the judgment rendered in Juveria Abdul Majid Patni Vs. Atif Iqbal Mansoori and Anr. (2014) 10 SCC 736 has held as under:-

"30. An act of domestic violence once committed, subsequent decree of divorce will not absolve the liability of the respondent from the offence committed or to deny the benefit to which the aggrieved person is entitled under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 including monetary relief under Section 20, Child Custody under Section 21, Compensation under Section 22 and interim or ex parte order under Section 23 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005."

After hearing learned counsel for the rival parties and in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Juveria Abdul Majid Patni (supra), this Court does not find any reason to interfere in the impugned order. Hence, this revision petition is hereby dismissed being devoid of any merits.

(DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL) JUDGE ojha

Digitally signed by YOGENDRA OJHA Date: 2023.03.03 18:08:00 +05'30'