Dismissed

Desh Raj v. Simro Devi

Himachal Pradesh HC3 Jul 2024CR.R/99/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged an interim maintenance award of Rs.3000 per month under Section 125 Cr.P.C., arguing the respondent had sufficient means including a widow pension and a daughter in Government job. The court found no illegality, noting that at the interim stage pleadings suffice, upheld the order, dismissed the revision petition, and directed expeditious decision of the main maintenance petit

What did the court decide?

Interim maintenance order upheld; deposited Rs.48,000 released to respondent; main Section 125 Cr.P.C. petition to be decided within two months.

Desh Raj Vs Simro Devi — Maintenance and Alimony | Himachal Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

Criminal Revision No.99 of 2024

¶3

Date of Decision: 03.07.2024

¶4

____________ ___________________________________________ Desh Raj …….Petitioner Versus Simro Devi … Respondent _______________________________________________________ Coram:

¶5

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.

¶6

Whether approved for reporting?¹ .

¶7

For the Petitioner: Mr. K.B. Khajuria and Mr. Pushpinder Verma, Advocates.

¶8

For the Respondent : Mr. D.N.Sharma, Advocate.

¶9

_______________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral):

¶10

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with order dated

¶11

06.02.2024 passed by learned Additional Principal Judge (Family

¶12

Court) Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, Himachal Pradesh, whereby learned Court below, while considering the prayer made on behalf of the respondent for grant of ad-interim maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C, proceeded to award sum of Rs.3000/- per month as interim maintenance, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings filed under Section 19(4) of the Family Court Act, praying therein to set-aside aforesaid order.

¶13

Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. K.B. Khajuria,

¶14

1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶15

¶16

learned counsel for the petitioner, is that learned Court below, while ordering ad-interim maintenance, failed to take note of the pleadings as well as other material adduced on record suggestive of the fact that the respondent has sufficient means to sustain herself. Learned counsel for the petitioner further states that Court below also failed to take note of the fact that the respondent is getting widow pension of Rs. 2000/- per month and her elder daughter is in Government job.

¶17

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record vis-à-vis reasoning assigned in the impugned order, this Court sees no illegality or infirmity in the same and as such, no interference is called for.

¶18

Needless to say, while considering prayer, if any, for ad-interim maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C, Court is not required to see documentary evidence, if any, adduced on record, rather at that stage, Court is only required to see pleadings of the parties seeking such maintenance. Very purpose and object of granting interim maintenance during the pendency of the main petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C., is to ensure that a person seeking such maintenance is not left to starve.

¶19

Consequently, in view of the above, this Court finds no merit in the present petition and accordingly same is dismissed, as a result thereof, order impugned in the instant proceedings is upheld,

¶20

¶21

with a direction to learned Court below to decide the main petition filed under Section 125 Cr.P.C, expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months. Needless to say, maintenance received by the respondent as ad-interim maintenance shall be adjusted in the amount, if any, awarded in the main petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C.

¶22

Pursuant to order dated 29.04.2024, petitioner has deposited sum of Rs. 48,000/- in the Registry of this Court on account of interim maintenance. Registry is directed to release the amount in favour of the respondent, by remitting the same in her saving bank account, details whereof shall be furnished by learned counsel for the respondent within a period of two days.

¶23

Learned counsel representing the parties undertake to cause presence of their respective clients before the Court below on 25.07.2024 , enabling it to do the needful well within stipulated time. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶24

(Sandeep Sharma), Judge

¶25

03^rd July, 2024

¶26

(shankar)

Desh Raj v. Simro Devi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Desh Raj v. Simro Devi

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

Jitender Singh and Another Vs State of Hp and Another

Aupama Gupta Vs Pankaj Goel

Madhu Sudan Vs Mithun Singh

Ajesh Kumar Vs State of Hp

Dheeraj Kumar and Another Vs State of Hp and Others

Rajender Singh Vs Videsh Sharma