Madhya Pradesh High Court
Vinod Jaat vs Anjali on 6 February, 2024
Author: Prem Narayan Singh
Bench: Prem Narayan Singh
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PREM NARAYAN SINGH
ON THE 6 th OF FEBRUARY, 2024
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 4230 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
VINOD JAAT S/O SHRI SHIVPRASAD JAAT, AGED
ABOUT 31 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NOTHING R/O 16
JAIPRAKASH MARG NEAR KUMHAR GADA BUS STAND
DISTT. DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(SHRI BHARAT YADAV, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER .
AND
1. ANJALI W/O VINOD JAAT, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: NOTHING R/O 37-A BRAJVIHAR
COLONY VAISHALI NAGAR INDORE (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. BABY HIMANI MINOR THROUGH NATURAL
GUARDIAN AND MOTHER ANJALI W/O VINOD
JAAT, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
NOTHING 37-A, BRAJVIHAR COLONY, VAISHALI
NAGAR, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI ANIL MALVIYA, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT [R-2].
This revision coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
1. This criminal revision has been filed by the petitioner under Section
19(4) of the Family Courts Act of Cr.P.C being aggrieved by the judgment
dated 25.02.2023, passed by learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court,
Indore, in MJCR No.1171/2017, whereby the learned Principal Judge has
allowed the application filed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C by awarding total
maintenance of total Rs.12000/-per month in favour of the respondents i.e.
(Rs.9000/- in favour of wife and Rs.3000/- in favour of respondent
no.1/daughter).
2 . During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the Trial Court has allowed the application for maintenance by
passing the final order, but during the pendency of the case, the petitioner has
filed and application under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. for re-examination of the
witnesses Anjali, but the same was dismissed on 20.03.2019 and against the
said order, the petitioner has filed CRR No.2450/2019, but the same was
pending before this Hon'ble Court and the final order was passed by the learned
trial Court, hence, the same was dismissed as rendered infructuous on
20.07.2019 without considering the evidence regarding income of the wife that
was required to be filed or considered by the learned trial Court pursuance to
the application under Section 311 of Cr.P.C.
3. It is also submitted that at this stage, however, he is not arguing the
matter on the question of quantum of maintenance amount, but the petitioner
was required to afford at least one opportunity to re-examine the witness and
the final order could not be passed by the court below without final adjudication
of the CRR pending before this Court. Hence, it is prayed that the the matter
may kindly be remitted back to consider afresh by giving one opportunity of re-
examine the witness and to produce the evidence regarding income of the
respondent and till the final disposal, the petitioner is ready to pay the
maintenance as awarded by learned trial Court.
4. On the other hand, counsel for the respondent has opposed the prayer
vehemently by submitting that the learned trial Court has considered the matter
finally, however, the respondents have also filed a revision petition for
enhancement of the maintenance amount. He fairly admitted that the final order
has been passed during the pendency of the criminal revision filed by the
petitioner against the order passed on the application filed under Section 311 of
Cr.P.C for re-examine the witness.
5. I have heard the counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. From the face of record, it is clear that the learned family Court has
passed the final order during the pendency of CRR No.2450/2019 which was
filed by the petitioner and the same was dismissed as rendered infructuous on
20.07.2019 which itself is reflecting from the said order, hence, in the interest of
justice, in my considered opinion, it would be appropriate to remit the matter
back to the learned trial Court for fresh consideration after giving proper
opportunity to the petitioner regarding production of documents with regard to
income of the respondent wife. If that be so, the learned family court shall
consider the matter afresh and pass final order based on the evidence so
produced by the parties. Hence, the criminal revision stands allowed.
7. However, as per submission of counsel for the petitioner, till the final
order is passed by learned family court, the petitioner shall pay the maintenance
of Rs.12000/- per month in favour of the respondents regularly as directed
without fail.
8. The Office is directed to send the record back to the concerned court
immediately alongwith the copy of this order.
With the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed off.
Certified copy, as per rules
(PREM NARAYAN SINGH)
JUDGE
amit
