Dismissed¶¶22

Naresh Kumar @ Naresh v. Pritty Srivastava

Patna HC8 Aug 2024CR. REV./330/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court Criminal Revision No 330 of 2024, decided 08-08-2024 by Justice Arvind Singh Chandel; arises out of a Muzaffarpur police case; challenges interim maintenance of Rs 14,000/- per month (Rs 7,000 wife, Rs 6,000 children, Rs 1,000 costs) granted by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Sitamarhi in Maintenance Case No 44 of 2020; revision dismissed; keywords: interim maintenance, legally wedded wife, legitimate children, unable to maintain themselves, no documentary evidence of salary, NAFR.

What did the court decide?

It is undisputed that opposite party No 1 is the legally wedded wife of the petitioner and that opposite parties Nos 2 and 3 were born from their wedlock and are presently residing with their mother. ¶¶14

Naresh Kumar @ Naresh Vs Pritty Srivastava — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned order dated 22.02.2024 of the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Sitamarhi, granting monthly interim maintenance of Rs 14,000/- to the opposite parties, suffers from any illegality or infirmity warranting interference in this criminal revision. +1 more

¶¶12

Court's answer

It is undisputed that opposite party No 1 is the legally wedded wife of the petitioner and that opposite parties Nos 2 and 3 were born from their wedlock and are presently residing with their mother.

¶¶14

Ratio / Principle

Since the wife is the petitioner's legally wedded wife and the remaining opposite parties are their legitimate children who reside separately and are unable to maintain themselves, the learned Principal Judge, Family Court rightly granted interim maintenance in their favour.

¶¶19

Key takeaways

This Court found no illegality or infirmity in the order of the learned Principal Judge, Family Court.ratio¶¶20
There is no documentary evidence of the petitioner's salary; the question of his income is left to be decided after recording of evidence.obiter¶¶15
No document was annexed or produced showing that opposite party No 1 works in a nursing hospital or draws a salary; this fact is also to be decided after the evidence of both parties.obiter

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Revision (Patna High Court, Arvind Singh Chandel, J., 08-08-2024) — dismissed. Challenge to the interim maintenance order dated 22.02.2024 of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Sitamarhi in Maintenance Case No 44 of 2020, directing the husband-petitioner to pay Rs 7,000/- per month to his wife, Rs 6,000/- for the two children and Rs 1,000/- towards litigation costs (total Rs 14,000/- per month). Holding the marriage and paternity undisputed, and the wife and legitimate children to be residing separately and unable to maintain themselves, the Court found the interim maintenance rightly granted and no illegality or infirmity in the order. The absence of documentary proof of the husband's salary and of the wife's alleged hospital employment was left to be decided on evidence at trial. NAFR.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL REVISION No 330 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-0 Thana- District- Muzaffarpur

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Naresh Kumar @ Naresh (male), aged about 41 years, Son of late Kameshwar Prasad Srivastava, Resident of Mohalla – Pani Tanki Church Road, Behind Binda Kothi, PS – Mithanpura, District - Muzaffarpur

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

1 Pritty Srivastava Wife Of Naresh Kumar Resident Of Village- Rajopatti, Rama Gas Agency Road, Near Dr. R. Pd. PS And Dist- Sitamarhi 2 Arnav, Son of Naresh Kumar 3 Ashmi, Son of Naresh Kumar, Opposite Party Nos 2 & 3 are under natural guardianship of Prity Srivastav (Mother), Resident Of Molhalla- Rajopatti, Rama Gas Agency Road, Near Dr. R. Pd. PS And Dist- Sitamarhi

¶8

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Amit Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr. ======================================================

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH CHANDEL

¶10

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶11

Date : 08-08-2024

¶12

Heard. Perused the impugned order, i e, order dated 22.02.2024 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Sitamarhi in Maintenance Case No 44 of 2020 whereby the learned Principal Judge, Family Court directed the petitioner to pay monthly interim maintenance of Rs 7,000/- to opposite party No 1 – wife, Rs 6,000/- to her children and further Rs 1,000/towards cost of litigation, i e, total Rs 14,000/- per month.

¶13

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.330 of 2024 dt.08-08-2024 2/3

¶14

2 Undisputedly, opposite party No 1 is the legally wedded wife of the petitioner, opposite parties No 2 and 3 are born from their wedlock and presently they are residing with their mother.

¶15

3 According to the pleadings, the petitioner is engaged in a job and is getting a handsome salary. However, no documentary evidence is available on record regarding salary of the petitioner and it will be decided only after recording of the evidence.

¶16

4 Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that opposite party No 1 is also working woman and presently she is working in a private Hospital but he has also not annexed any document with the petition or produced before the Principal Judge, Family Court which shows that opposite party No 1-wife is working in Nursing Hospital and is getting salary also. This fact will also be decided after recording the evidence of both the parties.

¶17

5 Since opposite party No 1 is the legally wedded wife of the petitioner and rest of the opposite parties are their legitimate children and they are residing separately and are unable to maintain themselves, therefore, the learned Principal Judge,

¶18

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.330 of 2024 dt.08-08-2024 3/3

¶19

Family Court has rightly granted the interim maintenance in their favour.

¶20

6 I, therefore, find no illegality/infirmity in the order of

¶21

the learned Principal Judge, Family Court.

¶22

7 Resultantly, this revision petition is dismissed.

¶23

(Arvind Singh Chandel, J)