Dr. Mukul Dev Sharma vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 597 UK

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
                Criminal Revision No. 92 of 2022

Dr. Mukul Dev Sharma                           ...Revisionist

                              Vs.
State of Uttarakhand and others               ...Respondents



Mr. Rajat Mittal, Advocate for the revisionist.
Mrs. Manisha Rana Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State of
Uttarakhand.
Mr. Vikas Bahuguna, Advocate for the private respondents.

                                       Dated: 7th March, 2022

Hon'ble N.S. Dhanik, J.

This criminal revision has been preferred by the revisionist challenging the impugned order dated 25.01.2022 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun in Case No. 214 of 2021, "Smt. Pooja Sharma v. Dr. Mukul Sharma" whereby a total interim maintenance of Rs. 18,000/- per month has been awarded in favour of the second respondent and expenses for son.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. Learned counsel for the private respondent although submitted that the revisionist have enough sources to give the maintenance to respondent no. 2 and his son but also submits that he has no objection if the aforementioned interim maintenance will be reduced to the tune of Rs. 15,000/- per month.

4. Learned counsel for the revisionist would submit that the second respondent is earning around Rs. 40,000/- per month. On the other hand, after throwing the revisionist out from the house, the revisionist has no place to live and even

have no source of income to pay the higher amount of maintenance to the second respondent. He also submits that while passing the impugned order, the learned Court below has failed to appreciate the settled proposition of law and provisions of Section 125 Cr.P.C. that the son after attaining the age of majority is not entitled to claim the maintenance.

5. After arguing at some length, he limits his prayer only to the extent that the matter may kindly be remanded back to the lower Court for its expeditious disposal.

6. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, the present criminal revision is disposed of with the following directions:

(i) The matter is remanded back to the learned Court below to decide the same without being prejudiced, as expeditiously as possible.

(ii) Till the final disposal of the case by the Court below, the revisionist shall pay a sum of Rs. 14,000/- per month to the second respondent. However, the learned Court below shall be at liberty to either reduce or enhance the amount of maintenance after hearing learned counsel for both the parties.

(iii) Needless to say that the interim maintenance modified herein would have no effect on the merits and the Court below is at liberty as given above.

7. Let a copy of this judgment be sent to the Court concerned for compliance.

(N.S. Dhanik, J.) 07.03.2022 SB