Allowed

Premlata v. Arun Kumar

Rajasthan HC13 May 2024CRLMP/1867/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a revision petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court enhanced the monthly maintenance awarded to the petitioner and her minor son under the Domestic Violence Act from Rs.4,000 to Rs.10,000, noting increased living costs and lack of proof regarding the petitioner's earning capacity.

What did the court decide?

The maintenance awarded was reordered to Rs.6,000 per month for the petitioner and Rs.4,000 per month for the minor son, totaling Rs.10,000 from the date of the order.

Premlata Vs Arun Kumar — Maintenance and Alimony | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:21246]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 1867/2021

¶4

Premlata W/o Arun Kumar D/o Rameshwar Lal Sharma, Aged About 39 Years, Plot No. 111-112, Shastrinagar, Near I.t.i. Nagaur At Present 1-C/35, Kuri Bhagatasani Housing Board, Jodhpur.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Arun Kumar S/o Kailash Chandra, Plot No. 111-112, Shastrinagar, Near I.t.i. Nagaur.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Lalit Kumar Purohit
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. A.R. Choudhary, PP
	Mr. Devendra Khatri for
	complainant

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

¶11

Order

¶12

13/05/2024

¶13

By way of filing the present criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner has prayed for

¶14

the following relief:-

¶15

“It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this revision petition may kindly be allowed and the impugned order dated 99.11.2020 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Women Atrocities Cases), Jodhpur Metro in Cr.Appeal Case No.55/2018 “Smt.Premlata Vs. Arun Kumar” may kindly be quashed and set aside and the order dated 11.12.2017 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate No.6, Jodhpur Metro in Misc.Cr.Case No.403/2010 may kindly be modified and the respondent may kindly be ordered to pay to the petitioner a monthly maintenance of Rs.50,000/- for her and her minor son Hardik.”

[CRLMP-1867/2021]

[2024:RJ-JD:21246]

(2 of 4)

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that vide impugned order dated 11.12.2017, the learned Additional Civil Judge-cum- Metropolitan Magistrate No.6, Jodhpur Metropolitan has allowed the application preferred by the petitioner under Section 12 read with Sections 18, 19, 20, 22 and 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act and has awarded the monthly maintenance amount of Rs.2,500/- for petitioner and Rs.1,500/- for the minor son namely Hardik (in total Rs.4,000/- per month). Learned counsel submitted that being aggrieved by the order dated 11.12.2017 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge-cum- Metropolitan Magistrate No.6, Jodhpur Metropolitan, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge (Women Atrocities Cases) Jodhpur Metropolitan, Jodhpur. However, the same has been rejected vide order dated 09.11.2020 while maintaining the order dated 11.12.2017.

¶20

Learned counsel submitted that the maintenance awarded in favour of the petitioner by the Court below is very meagre which may kindly be enhanced appropriately. Learned counsel further submitted that it is difficult for the petitioner to meet day to day expenditure of herself and minor son with the amount awarded by the learned Court below.

¶21

Per Contra , learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the petitioner is living separately without

(3 of 4)

[2024:RJ-JD:21246]

[CRLMP-1867/2021]

any justifiable cause. The petitioner possesses the degree of law and therefore, it can be safely presumed that she must be earning sufficient income to maintain herself and minor son. It was vehemently contended that respondent No.2 is having a monthly income of less than Rs.8,000/only. The Respondent No.2 is presently spending more than 50% of his monthly income in making payment of the maintenance so awarded to the petitioner. Learned counsel submitted that the orders impugned passed by the learned Courts below are well reasoned and therefore, they do not call for any interference by this Court.

¶26

Heard.

¶27

It is not in disputed before this Court that the petitioner is living with her son- Hardik separately from respondent No.2. It is a settled law that an able bodied person cannot deny payment of reasonable maintenance to his wife and minor children without any justifiable reasons.

¶28

In the opinion of this Court, the cost of living and education has increased multifold since passing of the order dated 11.12.2017 by the Additional Civil Judge-cumMetropolitan Magistrate No.6, Jodhpur Metropolitan. Respondent No.2 has though taken a defence that the petitioner is a LL.B. graduate and she is having sufficient income to maintain herself and minor son but no document/proof has been placed on record to establish income of the petitioner. The Respondent No.2 cannot be

(4 of 4)

[2024:RJ-JD:21246]

[CRLMP-1867/2021]

permitted to shirk away his responsibility to give a dignified life to his wife and son who are living separately. This Court therefore, deems it appropriate to enhance the maintenance awarded in favour of the petitioner and her minor son.

¶33

Consequently, the instant criminal misc. petition is allowed. The impugned orders dated 09.11.2020 and 11.12.2017 passed by the learned Courts below stand modified and the maintenance amount awarded to the petitioner is hereby enhanced to Rs.6,000/- in favour of the petitioner and Rs.4,000/- in favour of master- Hardik (in total Rs.10,000/-) per month from the date of passing of this order.

¶34

All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly.

¶35

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J

¶36

41-himanshu/-

Premlata v. Arun Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Premlata v. Arun Kumar

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

Ravindra @ Ravi Vs State of Rajasthan

Angrej Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Birbal Vs State of Rajasthan

Krishan Kumar Kushwah Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhaga Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Sharavan Ram Vs State of Rajasthan