High Court heard a criminal revision challenging a Family Court order awarding interim maintenance. Petitioner argued wife's earning capacity and his low income. Court found trial court acted on merits and upheld the order.
Petitioner directed to pay entire maintenance within one month.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:50790
Court No. - 29
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION DEFECTIVE No. - 268 of 2023
Revisionist :- Jagroop @ Babuji Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Alok Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Renu Agarwal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present revision has been filed under Section 19(4) of The Family Court's Act, 1984 against the judgment and order dated 11.07.2022 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Hardoi in Case No.345 of 2016 (Smt. Soni Vs. Jagroop @ Babuji) by which learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Hardoi has directed the revisionist to pay Rs.2,000/- per month to the opposite party no.2 as an interim maintenance from the date of application.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that revisionist solemnized marriage with the opposite party No.2 on 16.06.2012 according to Hindu Rituals. The opposite party No.2 pressurized the revisionist to live separately from his old parents and after about 4 years from the date of marriage, opposite party No.2 has left her matrimonial house with all her ornaments and clothes. Thereafter, the opposite party No.2 moved an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. before Principal Judge, Family court, Hardoi which was allowed vide order dated 11.07.2022 providing Rs.2,000/- per month as maintenance to the respondent no.2 from the date of application. It is further submitted that the revisionist is ready to live with the opposite party No.2. Opposite party No.2 is an educated lady and she is earning income by stitching work. Her earning is quite enough to maintain herself. Revisionist is only earning income from agricultural field which is meager in amount. Learned trial court did not consider the above mentioned facts in the impugned judgment dated 11.07.2022. Therefore the said judgment is liable to be set aside.
From a perusal of the record and the impugned judgment, it transpires that there is an allegation of demand of dowry against
the revisionist by the opposite party No.2 and due to non fulfillment of the said demand, she was subjected to cruelty and a threat to set her ablaze. Ultimately, she was banished from her matrimonial home. It was also alleged that the revisionist is having an agricultural land of area 20 Bigha and three buffaloes. He earns Rs.30,000/- per month. It was also stated that opposite party No.2 was being treated cruelly by her husband in her matrimonial home and she is unable to maintain herself.
On the contrary, learned counsel for the revisionist admits in his cross-examination that he has 15-16 Bigha agricultural field. He also admits that he has three buffaloes but he denied the income of Rs.30,000/- per month and selling milk of buffaloes. It was further stated before the trial court that due to natural calamities his income from agricultural land is not too much, therefore, the learned trial court awarded nominal maintenance amount of Rs.2,000/- per month to be given to the opposite party No.2 by the revisionist.
In view of the above, this Court finds that the learned trial court has decided the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. on merits. It has discussed the sources of incomes as well as physical and mental cruelty subjected to opposite party no.2 and the fact that opposite party no.2 is not able to maintain herself. Therefore, there is no illegality in the order of maintenance passed by the Family Court dated 11.07.2022.
Accordingly, the order dated 11.07.2022 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Hardoi is upheld and the revision is hereby dismissed.
Revisionist is directed to pay entire maintenance to the opposite party no.2 within one month from the date of order of this Court.
Order Date :- 2.8.2023 S. Shivhare
Digitally signed by :- SHASHANK SHIVHARE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Family Court committed any illegality in awarding interim maintenance of Rs.2,000/- per month under Section 125 Cr.P.C.
Whether the trial court failed to consider the petitioner's income and agricultural assets.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to have the maintenance order set aside in view of the wife's earning capacity.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Jagroop @ Babuji
State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.
Opposite Party no.2
Renu Agarwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
