High Court in criminal revision dismissed the husband's challenge to the Family Court's order granting wife monthly maintenance. The court held that oral village settlements cannot annihilate matrimonial ties as divorce requires a decree, and past lump sum payments do not preclude ongoing maintenance duties. No relief was granted to the husband.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL REVISION No.54 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-1111 Thana- District-
======================================================
Heera Lal Sahni Shankar Sahni, resident of Village - Ram Nagar Mathlohiyar, Police Station - Harsidhi, Distt.- East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
Seema Devi wife of Heera lal Sahni, Daughter of Late Bhikhari Sahni, resident of Village- Sonbarsa, police Station - Harsidhi, Distt.- East Champaran
... ... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Kumar, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anang Mohan Sinha, APP ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI ORAL ORDER
4 18-12-2023
Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.54 of 2019(4) dt.18-12-2023 2/5
solve the matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and the opposite party. In the said village settlement a panchnama was recorded, which was signed by the parties and other witnesses. In the said panchnama, it was specifically observed that the dispute between the parties could not be settled and the opposite party/husband was directed to pay Rs.1,50,000/- (One Lakh Fifty Thousand) in lump sum, towards the one time maintenance allowance to the petitioner. The said maintenance allowance was paid by the present petitioner/husband to the present opposite party/wife. It is recorded in the panchnama itself.
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.54 of 2019(4) dt.18-12-2023 3/5
date recorded in the said panchnamd. However, the recital of the panchnama supports the date i.e. 25th July, 2009. Therefore, the learned trial Judge was wrong in refusing the credence evidenciary weight to the said document (Panchnama). It is also contended that the learned trial Judge failed to consider that the parties amicable settled to stay separately and in view of the provision contained in Section 125(4) of the Cr.P.C., if the parties agree to stay separately on mutual consent, the wife is not entitle to gate any maintenance.
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.54 of 2019(4) dt.18-12-2023 4/5
petitioner to her in her evidence.
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.54 of 2019(4) dt.18-12-2023 5/5
no. 2 for her maintenance in the year 2009, such amount is not sufficient to maintain oneself for the entire life. In the instance case the opposite party no. 2 payed for a meager amount of Rs.2,000/- per month. The trial court granted Rs.1500/- per month towards maintenance allowance. There is no documents that the opposite party no. 2 have any independent earning in the written statement itself. The petitioner made an allegation that the opposite party no. 2 is a lady of questionable character. If the wife refuses to live with the petitioner due to such imputation with regard to character and chastity of a lady, this is sufficient for the opposite party to claim maintenance from the petitioner/husband.
(Bibek Chaudhuri, J)
pravinkumar/-
U T
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a village settlement creating an oral agreement for separate living is sufficient to deny maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C.
Whether a one-time lump sum payment of Rs. 1,50,000 satisfies a wife's lifelong maintenance needs when she had not earned independently.
Whether allegations of a wife's questionable character deprive the husband of the right to claim non-maintenance.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Heera Lal Sahni
Seema Devi
Bibek Chaudhuri
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
