Dr.M.C Mahesh Kumar Vs Dr.M. Sharada

DR. M. SHARADA D/O LATE MADAIAH, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, RESIDING AT "RAJAGRAHA" WARD NO. 16, JAI BHEEM NAGAR IST STAGE, BANNUR T. NARASIPURA TALUK, MYSURU - 571 101.

¶14

…RESPONDENT

¶15

(BY SRI. VINUTHAN MURTHY B.V, ADVOCATE)

¶16

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) PRAYING TO ALLOW THE CRL.P AND MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 02.07.2024 AND TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS ON THE PETITION FILED BY THE RESPONDENT AGAINST THE PETITIONERS UNDER THE

¶17

2 -

¶18

NC: 2025:KHC:29947 CRL.P No. 10610 of 2024

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

PROVISIONS OF SEC.144(1)(A) OF BNSS IN CRL.MISC.NO.488/2024 ON THE FILE OF LEARNED CIVIL JUDGE T.NARASIPURA MYSURU DISTRICT.

¶21

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

This petition is filed by the husband assailing the exparte interim maintenance awarded by the learned Magistrate vide order dated 02.07.2024 and further petitioner is also seeking for quashing of the proceedings pending in Crl. Misc. No.488/2024.

¶25

Heard the petitioner's counsel and perused the judgments cited on behalf of the petitioner - husband and the learned counsel appearing for respondent - wife.

¶26

Though this Court is not inclined to grant the main relief sought by the petitioner for quashing the proceedings in Crl. Misc. No.488/2024, which arise out of a maintenance petition filed by the respondent-wife under the criminal miscellaneous jurisdiction, this Court is, however, of the

¶27

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:29947 CRL.P No. 10610 of 2024

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

considered opinion that the interlocutory order dated 02.07.2024 granting interim maintenance warrants interference.

¶30

As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner-husband, the learned Magistrate, while granting interim maintenance, has failed to consider the affidavit of assets and liabilities submitted by the petitioner. The petitioner has specifically contended that the respondent-wife is wellqualified, holds a doctorate in Political Science, and is employed as a Professor. Though the respondent-wife has disclosed her educational qualifications, her affidavit does not reflect whether she is gainfully employed or in receipt of regular income. While the respondent's counsel, in response, has submitted that the wife was not employed at the relevant point of time due to her undergoing treatment for cancer, this Court finds that the affidavit filed by the respondent-wife is incomplete and lacks relevant particulars regarding her earning capacity or absence thereof.

¶31

In such proceedings, a party claiming maintenance

¶32

is required to file a full and true disclosure of income, assets,

¶33

4 -

¶34

NC: 2025:KHC:29947 CRL.P No. 10610 of 2024

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

and liabilities. The learned Magistrate, while empowered to grant ex parte interim maintenance, ought to have satisfied himself regarding the financial capacity and earning status of the respondent-wife before passing such an order. In the present case, such a satisfaction is conspicuously absent. Further, the learned Magistrate did not afford the petitioner an opportunity to respond before passing the ex parte order. In these circumstances, the order dated 02.07.2024 suffers from procedural irregularity and is liable to be set aside.

¶37

This Court is of the view that remanding the matter

¶38

to the learned Magistrate for reconsideration would not prejudice the respondent-wife. If the respondent is indeed unable to sustain herself and is undergoing medical treatment, she is at liberty to disclose the same along with particulars of her income or lack thereof. Upon such disclosure, if the Magistrate is satisfied, she would be entitled to interim maintenance from the date of the application.

¶39

In light of the above discussion, this Court proceeds to pass the following:

¶40

5 -

¶41

NC: 2025:KHC:29947 CRL.P No. 10610 of 2024

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

ORDER

¶44

i) The petition is allowed in part. The order dated 02.07.2024 passed by the learned Magistrate granting interim maintenance is hereby quashed and set aside.

¶45

ii) The matter is remitted to the learned Magistrate for fresh consideration in accordance with law.

¶46

iii) The petitioner shall file his detailed objections, if any, within one week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶47

iv) The learned Magistrate, after providing an opportunity of hearing to both parties, shall reconsider the application seeking interim maintenance and pass appropriate orders.

¶48

v) The learned Magistrate is requested to expedite the hearing and dispose of the matter at the earliest. Both parties and their respective counsels shall cooperate for the expeditious disposal of the application.

¶49

vi) The amount already deposited pursuant to the impugned order shall be remitted back to the learned Magistrate forthwith.

¶50

vii) In the event the respondent-wife succeeds in establishing her entitlement to interim

¶51