Dismissed

Krushna Dattu Mahajan v. Dimpal @ Rani W/O Krushna Mahajan and Another

Bombay HC7 Oct 2024APPLN/3311/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge dismissed a criminal application challenging an order granting interim maintenance to the wife and minor son. The Court held that maintenance under other laws does not bar claims under the DV Act and rejected the challenge that the granted amount was illegal or perverse.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed with costs of Rs. 5000/- payable to the non-applicants.

Krushna Dattu Mahajan Vs Dimpal @ Rani W/O Krushna… — Maintenance and Alimony | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-AUG:24716

¶2

corrected 25appln3311-23

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

25 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3311 OF 2023

¶5

KRUSHNA DATTU MAHAJAN

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

DIMPAL @ RANI W/O KRUSHNA MAHAJAN AND ANOTHER

¶8

Mr. Suryawanshi Surendra V., Advocate for Applicant Mr. Jadhav Yogesh Arun, Advocate for Respondents

¶9

CORAM : Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J. Dated : 7th October, 2024

¶10

PER COURT :-

¶11

Heard Mr. Suryawanshi, the learned Counsel for the

¶12

Applicant and Mr. Jadhav, the learned counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

¶13

By the present application under section 482 of the Cr.P.C., the Applicant husband challenges the order dated 25.05.2022 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chalisgaon, in PWDVA No. 159 of 2016, whereby the Applicant husband was directed to pay interim maintenance @ Rs.2000/per month to the Non-applicant No.1 (original applicant No.1 wife) and Rs.1500/- to the present Non applicant No.2 (minor son) w.e.f. 15.01.2019 and litigation cost of Rs.1000/-.

¶14

1 of 3

¶15

corrected 25appln3311-23

¶16

The learned counsel appearing for the Applicant contended that, the non-applicant has already approached before other courts with several proceedings under the Family Laws and appropriate maintenance already been granted in favour of the non-applicant/wife, therefore, the non-applicant is not entitled for any maintenance under the provisions of D.V. Act.

¶17

Needless to say that, grant of maintenance in other statutory provisions of laws does not create bar to the nonapplicant wife for claiming the maintenance under the provisions

¶18

of D.V. Act as it is independent enactment. Therefore, the submissions canvassed on behalf of the applicant is not acceptable to my judicious conscious.

¶19

It is not in dispute that, on 12.02.2012, the marriage of the present Applicant solemnized with non applicant No.1 (original applicant No.1 wife). It is also not in dispute that out of matrimonial relation, the Applicant and Non applicant No.1 begotten a child Non applicant No.2. On face of record, it appears that the applicant and Non-applicant No.1 stayed together till 28.10.2016 on which day, the Non applicant wife left for her parental house and since then the present Applicant (husband)

¶20

2 of 3

¶21

corrected 25appln3311-23

¶22

failed to provide any maintenance to Non-applicant Nos. 1 and 2. Thereafter, the Non-applicant No.1 filed a proceeding i.e. PWDVA No. 159 of 2016 under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. The Non applicant No.1 also filed an Application Exh. 25 and prayed for interim maintenance. After Considering the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the Case of Rajnishi Vs. Neha, AIR 2021 SUPREME COURT 569 as well as considering the income of the present Applicant, the learned Trial Court granted interim maintenance @ Rs.2000/per month to the Non applicant No.1 wife and Rs.1500/- to the present Non-applicant No.2 (minor son) w.e.f. 15.01.2019, which does not appear perverse, illegal or bad in law. Therefore, no interference is warranted for at the hands of this Court.

¶23

In view of the above, the present application is

¶24

dismissed with cost of Rs.5000/- to be paid to the non applicants.

¶25

( Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J. )

¶26

Chavan

¶27

3 of 3

Krushna Dattu Mahajan v. Dimpal @ Rani W/O Krushna Mahajan and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krushna Dattu Mahajan v. Dimpal @ Rani W/O Krushna Mahajan and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sau. Urmila W/O Govind Naik Alias Urmila D/O Padmakar Ghumare vs Govind S/O. Sudhakarrao Naik

Dr Abhijit S/O Ashok Gadhave vs Prachi W/O Abhijit Gadhave

Asna Anjum W/O Kazi Mohammad Farhanoddin Faruqui vs Kazi Mohammad Farhanoddin Faruqui S/O Kazi Mohammad Azizoddin Faruqui

Hemlata W/O. Ramprasad Dabhade Vs Ramprasad Tukaramji Dabhade

Manishkumar Nilkanth Ingale Vs Priyanka Manishkumar Ingale

Sushilabai Anna Kamble Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another