Sube Singh vs Sumitra Devi
2022 Latest Caselaw 7884 P&H

CRR(F)-635-2022                                                          -1-

110
        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                      AT CHANDIGARH


                                  CRR(F)-635-2022
                                  Date of Decision: July 27, 2022

Sube Singh                                                 .....Petitioner
                    Versus
Sumitra Devi
                                                           ......Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ

Present:     Mr.S.P.Yadav, Advocate
             for the petitioner.
                    ........

RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.(ORAL)

The petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing the

present revision petition impugning the order dated 07.05.2022 passed by

the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Narnaul, whereby interim

maintenance @ Rs.10,000/- per month has been awarded to the respondent-

wife.

It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that

the learned Family Court has fallen in error in awarding the maintenance. He

contends that the petitioner is employed in Boarder Security Force (BSF) as

Constable. The marriage in question took place in the year 2012. After the

marriage, the respondent-wife did not cooperate and adjust in the family. It

is further submitted that due to the service condition of the petitioner, he had

to be away from his home. The respondent-wife always pressurised him to

take her alongwith him or to leave the job. The petitioner had only two

options either to leave the job or to remain at home but it was not possible

for him as neither he could take the wife alongwith him at the place of his

1 of 3

posting nor he could leave the job. He submits that the respondent-wife left

the matrimonial home of her own and the allegations pertaining to

harassment and cruelty are totally false and frivolous. He has submitted that

as the respondent-wife left the home without any rhyme and reason, the

maintenance granted by the Court below is totally unsustainable in the eyes

of law. He submits that earlier the petitioner was giving maintenance of

Rs.8,000/- per month, however, the Court has awarded Rs.10,000/- per

month which is totally against the evidence on record and hence the order

dated 07.05.2022 deserves to be set aside.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

Relationship between the petitioner and the respondent-wife is

not disputed. Admittedly, the petitioner is employed in BSF and is getting

the salary of Rs.60,000/- per month. There is nothing on record that the

respondent-wife has left the home without any valid reason. She filed the

petition for her maintenance and as the petitioner was not able to attend the

Court due to his service conditions, learned Family Court made an interim

arrangement by directing the petitioner to pay Rs.8000/- per month till the

disposal of the application for interim maintenance. However, keeping in

view the evidence produced by the parties, the application for interim

maintenance was decided by virtue of impugned order dated 07.05.2022 and

the learned Court allowed maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month. The

provisions of Section 125 Cr.P.C. are for preventing destitution and

vagrancy. The petitioner is an able bodied person. As per the law settled by

Hon'ble Supreme Court in plethora of judgments, the husband is legally and

morally bound to look after his wife. The precise submission of the learned

counsel for the petitioner is that the respondent-wife left the matrimonial

2 of 3

home of her own and thus, she is not entitled for any maintenance.

However, the allegations levelled by the petitioner are to be proved during

the trial of the case by leading evidence. As per the law settled by Hon'ble

Supreme Court in case of Rajnesh Vs. Neha, 2021(2) SCC 324, the

husband is legally and morally responsible for maintaining the wife and the

children.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstance of the case and the

income of the petitioner, the learned Family Court has granted the

maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month to the wife.

In the overall facts and circumstances, this Court finds no

infirmity the order passed by the learned Family Court, thus, the petition

being devoid of any merit, is hereby dismissed.

July 27, 2022                                 ( RAJESH BHARDWAJ )
meenuss                                              JUDGE
1.    Whether speaking/reasoned ?                          Yes/No
2.    Whether reportable ?                                 Yes/No




                               3 of 3