Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Sugnabai vs Surendra Singh on 22 May, 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 22 nd OF MAY, 2024
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 4242 of 2019
BETWEEN:-
SMT. SUGNABAI W/O SURENDRA SINGH RAJPUT, AGED
ABOUT 25 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NONE VILLAGE
BELARI, TEHSIL NEEMUCH/ IN PRESENT VILLAGE
SAGRANA, TEHSIL NEEMUCH (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(SHRI RISHI AGRAWAL, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER
AND
SURENDRA SINGH S/O BHARATSINGH RAJPUT, AGED
ABOUT 31 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NAUKARI AVM KHETI
VILLAGE BELARI, TEHSIL NEEMUCH (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(NONE)
This revision coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
1.This criminal revision has been filed by the petitioners under Section
19(4) of the Family Courts Act of Cr.P.C being aggrieved by the judgment
dated 29.06.2019, passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Neemuch,
in MJC No.347/2014, whereby the learned Principal Judge has partly allowed
the application filed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C by awarding maintenance of
Rs.5,000/-per month to the petitioner.
2.Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the amount of
maintenance of Rs.5000/- for the petitioner/wife is on lower side in view of the
income of the husband because the respondent/husband was working as
government servant. Although, the respondent has stated before the learned
family Court that he has left his job. Hence, the maintenance amount may be
enhanced to Rs.15,000/-.
3. None for the respondent even after service of notice.
4.I have the contention of counsel for the petitioner and perused the
record as well as impugned order.
5. From the face of record, it is clear that that the respondent husband
has stated in his examination-in-chief that earlier he was serving in the service,
but now he has left the job and working only as agricultural farmer. Certainly,
there is no record regarding his income from service and only Ex.P.9 to P/15
have been produced showing agricultural income.
6. Solely, based on such statement that the petitioner has left his job and
having no means of income, he cannot get away from payment of maintenance
to his wife. Hence, he has to pay the amount of maintenance to his wife looking
to the all proper perspectives of ongoing expenditures nowadays, hence, the
amount of Rs.5,000/- seems to be on the lower side and looking to the facts
and circumstances of the case, it may be enhanced from Rs.5,000/- to Rs.
7,000/-.
7.Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of with a direction that the
maintenance amount awarded by the Family Court is enhanced from Rs.5,000/-
to Rs.7000/- and the respondent/husband shall pay Rs.7000/- to the
applicant/wife per month from the date of order passed by the Family Court i.e.
29.06.2019. Remaining part of the order passed by learned Family Court shall
remain intact.
8. The amount of arrears shall be paid by the respondent within two
months from today and he is also directed to pay the regular amount of
maintenance also.
9.With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed of.
10. A copy of this order be sent to the learned trial Court concerned for
information.
Certified copy, as per rules.
(PREM NARAYAN SINGH)
JUDGE
amit
