Dismissed

Smt. Prachi Shrivastava v. Priyank Shrivastava

Chhattisgarh HC14 Jun 2024CRR/907/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed the wife's criminal revision challenging the Family Court's interim maintenance award. The court held that the Family Court's discretion was proper as the quantum of maintenance was yet to be decided after evidence.

What did the court decide?

The revision petition was dismissed; the Family Court was directed to decide the maintenance application as early as possible.

Smt. Prachi Shrivastava Vs Priyank Shrivastava — Maintenance and Alimony | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

1 / 6

2024:CGHC:20050

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

CRR No. 907 of 2023

¶6

1 - Smt. Prachi Shrivastava Wife Of Priyank Shrivastava, Aged About 26 Years Daughter Of Birendra Shrivastava, Resident Of Mayka Plot No. 28, Street No. 01, House Of Hariom Town, Nehru Nagar, P.S. Supela Bhilai, District - Durg, Chhattisgarh.

¶7

... Petitioners

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - Priyank Shrivastava Son Of Kamla Shankar Shrivastava, Aged About 33 Years Resident Of D-20, Balram Das Ward Nehru Nagar, Rajnandgaon, District - Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh.

¶10

... Respondents

¶11

For Petitioners	: Mr. Ravipal maheshwari along with Mr. Bharat Lal Sahu, Advocate
For Respondent	: Mr. Sandeep Patel on behalf of Mr. Manoj Paranjpe,
	Advocate

¶12

Hon’ble Justice Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J.

¶13

Order On Board

¶14

15/06/2024

¶15

1. The present criminal revision has been filed by the applicant/ wife against the order dated 20/07/2023 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg in Case No. 1617/2022 whereby the learned Family Court has partly allowed the interim maintenance application filed by

¶16

2 / 6

¶17

the applicant and has granted Rs. 7000/- per month as interim maintenance.

¶18

2. The brief facts of the case are that the marriage between the applicant and non-applicant is solemnized on 28/11/2021 as per their rights and rituals. After some time of marriage, the behavior of the non-applicant and his family members were changed towards the applicant and they started harassing her for demand of dowry. At the time of marriage, the father of the applicant had given Rs. 20,00,000/- to the father of the non-applicant through bank transaction. The applicant was harassed by her husband and in-laws for demand of dowry and also for various other reasons and ultimately on 29^th March, 2022, when the applicant had gone to her matrimonial house along with her parents, her husband and in laws have not permitted her to reside there and refused to accept her in their house and then she returned back along with her parents and since then, she is resided with her parents. On 21/06/2022, she made a complaint to Mahila Thana on which offence under Section 498 A/34 of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, has been registered against the non-applicant and charge-sheet has been filed against him and his family members. On 03/12/2022, the applicant had filed an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. for grant of monthly maintenance amount of Rs. 25,000/- from the nonapplicant before the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg. Along with main application an application for grant of interim monthly maintenance of Rs. 25,000/- per month has also been filed by the applicant.

¶19

3. The non-applicant has noticed with the application of the applicant and he filed his reply in the case. Vide order dated 17/01/2023 and

¶20

3 / 6

¶21

06/02/2023, the efforts of mediation between the parties were drawn but the same could not conclude in positive result and mediation failed, which reflects from the order sheet dated 15/03/2023. Thereafter, after hearing the parties, the learned family Court has passed the order on 20/07/2023 and decided the interim maintenance application and granted Rs. 7000/- per month as monthly interim maintenance amount from the date of passing of the order which is under challenge in the present criminal revision by the applicant.

¶22

4. The non-applicant in his reply has denied the allegations made in the application and has submitted that the applicant herself is not willing to reside with the non-applicant. She was not having good behavior with the parents of the non-applicant even with the non-applicant. All the allegations of harassment and demand of dowry have been denied in his reply. It is submitted in his reply that Rs. 20,00,000/- has been given to the father of the non-applicant by the father of the applicant on his own with love and affection of his daughter and not on the demand of his father. Various instances have been averred in their reply with respect to the conduct and behavior of the applicant and pleaded that the applicant is residing separately without any sufficient reason from the non-applicant and therefore, she is not entitled for any maintenance amount. The non-applicant had submitted his affidavit as directed by the learned Family Court in compliance of the judgment passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Rajesh Vs. Neha & Anr. reported in (2021) 2 SCC 324.

¶23

5. After hearing the parties, the learned Family Court has decided the interim maintenance application on 20/07/2023 and granted Rs. 7000/-

¶24

4 / 6

¶25

per month as interim maintenance from the date of its order to the applicant, which is under challenge in the present criminal revision filed by the applicant.

¶26

6. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that in view of the monthly income and status of the parties, very meager amount have been awarded to the applicant as interim maintenance. The nonapplicant has admitted the fact that Rs. 20 lakhs which was given by the father of the applicant to the father of the non-applicant at the time of marriage is still with him and they earned interest from that amount. The non-applicant is having sufficient source of his income and earning more than Rs. 50,000/- per month and thereby, he is able and capable to pay monthly maintenance amount sufficiently to the applicant. But the learned Family Court has not considered the evidence available on record in its right perspective and have awarded a meager amount. He would further submit that the non-applicant is employed at Bank of India and his salary is about 60,000/- and thus, he claimed to Rs. 20,000/- per month as interim maintenance amount.

¶27

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that though the applicant is not entitled for any maintenance amount from the non-applicant because of the reason that she is residing separately from her husband without any sufficient reason yet she being the wife, the non-applicant is paying the monthly maintenance amount as ordered by the learned Family Court. The learned Family Court has rightly assessed the income and status of the parties and

¶28

5 / 6

¶29

has granted Rs. 7000/- per month as interim maintenance, which is just and proper and needs no interference.

¶30

8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the document annexed with the revision petition.

¶31

9. The grant of maintenance is the discretion of the Family Court, depending upon the evidence produced by the parties before it and the assessment of the requirement of the monthly maintenance amount depends upon the income and status of the parties. From perusal of the impugned order, it reveals that the learned Family Court has considered the guidelines issued in the matter of Rajnesh Vs. Neha (supra) and further considered the affidavit submitted by the nonapplicant including his salary slip and considered the day to day requirement of the expences and present cost of living, the learned family Court has granted Rs. 7000/- per month to the applicant as interim monthly maintenance.

¶32

10. The requirement of the applicant for day to day expenses, clothing, medicines etc and also the income of the parties is yet to be decided by the learned Family Court and parties are having opportunity to lead evidence and to cross-examine the witnesses produced by the parties. At this stage, when the interim monthly maintenance application is decided, it cannot be proper for this Court to interfere with the quantum of the monthly maintenance amount which has been granted by the learned Family Court and therefore this Court is of the opinion that the learned Family Court has rightly granted the amount of interim maintenance to the applicant and there is no scope for reconsideration or granting of higher amount at this stage.

¶33

6 / 6

¶34

11. In the result, the revision petition filed by the applicant is dismissed. However, the learned Family Court is directed to decided the application for grant of maintenance as early as possible.

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) JUDGE

¶37

Sagrika

Smt. Prachi Shrivastava v. Priyank Shrivastava

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Prachi Shrivastava v. Priyank Shrivastava

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rai Bahadur Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mukesh Boga Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Kanhaiya Lal Sahu Vs Anil Verma

Sanju @ Vikesh Kumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Govind Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Madavi Malla Vs State of Chhattisgarh