Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Hemant Sharma @ Hemraj Sharma vs Pooja Sharma on 18 August, 2023
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc. (Pet.) No. 5001/2019
Hemant Sharma @ Hemraj Sharma S/o Shri Prabhulal Ji
Sharma, Aged About 44 Years, By Caste Brahman, R/o Through
Shri Mangilal Ji Gaur, 223-A, Behind Laxmi School, Third Gali,
Bhagat Ki Kothi, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Pooja Sharma W/o Hemant Sharma @ Hemraj Sharma
D/o Shri Surendra Kumar Kaushik, By Caste Brahman, R/
o Piprali Road, Behind Royal Dharam Kanta, Sikar.
2. Prince @ Lakshit Sharma S/o Shri Hemant Sharma @
Hemraj Sharma, Aged About 17 Years, Through Natural
Guardian Mother Smt. Pooja Sharma, By Caste Brahman,
R/o Piprali Road, Behind Royal Dharam Kanta, Sikar.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Nagraj Goswami.
For Respondent(s) : Mr.Gaurav Singh, P.P.
For Complainant(s) : Ms.Kirti Pareek.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
ORDER
18/08/2023
The instant criminal miscellaneous petition has been
preferred by the petitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C. giving a
challenge to the order dated 1.8.2019 passed by learned Judge,
Family Court No.1, Jodhpur in Cr.Misc. Application No.141/2018
"Smt.Pooja Sharma & Anr. Vs. Hemant Sharma" whereby the
petitioner's objection was partly allowed and an amount of
Rs.1,79,000/- was determined to be payable by the present
petitioner to the respondents, who were applicants before learned
Family Court seeking interim maintenance from the petitioner.
(2 of 3) [CRLMP-5001/2019]
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the learned
court below committed an illegality in directing payment of
maintenance in favour of the respondents No.1 and 2 beyond a
period of one year. Learned counsel submitted that the language
of Section 125(3) Cr.P.C. is very clear and an application for
recovery of amount of arrears for a period of more than one year
cannot be filed. Learned counsel submitted that the learned court
below committed an error in directing the petitioner to pay arrears
for the maintenance beyond a period of one year. Learned counsel
submitted that the learned court below has further committed an
illegality while directing that the application of the respondents
shall be considered to be within time.
Placing reliance on a judgment rendered by Hon'ble Division
Bench of this Court in D.B.Criminal Reference No.2/2020 (In
Re A Ref. U/s 395 Cr.P.C. By District and Sessions Judge,
Pali Vs. Unknown) decided on 3.12.2021, learned counsel
submitted that the impugned order passed by learned Family
Court is without jurisdiction and thus, the same deserves to be
quashed and set aside.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel
representing the respondents Nos.1 and 2 have vehemently
opposed the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the
petitioner and have prayed for dismissal of the instant misc.
petition.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public
Prosecutor and learned counsel for the respondents Nos.1 and 2.
Perused the impugned order.
(3 of 3) [CRLMP-5001/2019]
Having gone through the record and the impugned order, this
Court prima facie finds that the learned Family Court has not
taken into consideration the proviso to sub-section (3) of Section
125 Cr.P.C. in its true letter and spirit.
In the opinion of this Court, no application for recovery of
arrears beyond a period of 12 months from the date, it falls due
can be entertained as the same is barred by the above-mentioned
proviso to Section 125(3) Cr.P.C.
In wake of the aforesaid discussion, the instant criminal
misc. petition is allowed. The impugned order 1.8.2019 passed by
learned Judge, Family Court No.1, Jodhpur in Cr.Misc. Application
No.141/2018 "Smt.Pooja Sharma & Anr. Vs. Hemant Sharma" is
quashed and set aside.
The petitioner is directed to satisfy the due amount of
arrears for the period of one year if not already done by him.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
/tarun goyal/
Sr.No.492
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
