Dismissed

Lakhan S/O Late Shri Rambharos B/C Harijan v. Chandana W/O Shri Lakhan D/O Mangatram B/C Harijan

Rajasthan HC16 Apr 2024CRLR/211/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected a criminal revision petition challenging a Family Court order awarding monthly maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C., holding that the impugned order was just and proper with no interference required.

What did the court decide?

The criminal revision petition and the stay application were rejected, thereby upholding the Family Court order of maintenance.

Lakhan S/O Late Shri Rambharos B/C Harijan Vs… — Maintenance and Alimony | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 211/2020

¶3

Lakhan S/o Late Shri Rambharos, R/o Ismail Chowk Nayapura Kota, Distt. Kota Raj.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Chandana W/o Shri Lakhan D/o Mangatram, R/o Bunk Road, Khajurpura, Baran Distt. Baran Raj.

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manoj Prajapat, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Atul Sharma, PP

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order

¶10

16/04/2024

¶11

Aggrieved by the order dated 21.11.2019 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Baran in Criminal Case No.44/19, the application filed by the respondent under Section 125 Cr.P.C. has been allowed and the petitioner has been directed to pay maintenance of Rs.4,000/- per month to the respondent with effect from the date of filing the application.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an unemployed person and he is not in a position to pay such huge amount of maintenance to the respondent. Counsel submits that this material aspect of the matter has not been considered by the learned Judge, Family Court, while passing the impugned order. Counsel submits that under these circumstances, the impugned order dated 21.11.2019 is liable to be quashed and set aside.

¶13

Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on the record.

¶14

[CRLR-211/2020]

¶15

(2 of 2)

¶16

Perusal of the record indicates that marriage of the parties was solemnized on 20.01.2014 and owing to matrimonial disputes between them and the respondent submitted an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. before the Family Court for getting maintenance. It was pleaded in the application that the petitioner is working in a government hospital and he is taking contracts of cleaning and his earning of Rs.40,000/- per month. The petitioner submitted reply to the aforesaid application and deny the averments and submitted that he is hardly earning of Rs.2,500/per month and he is unemployed since last six months. After hearing the arguments of both sides, learned Judge allowed the application filed by the respondent and directed the petitioner to pay the maintenance of Rs.4,000/- per month to the respondent. The provisions contained under Section 125 Cr.P.C. is a measure of social justice entitled to protect the right of the wife and the minor child with object to prevent vagrancy and destitution as held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Dwarika Prasad Satpathy Vs Bidyut Prava Dixit And Another reported in AIR 1999 SC 3348 . This Court finds no error in the impugned order passed by the Family Court, as the petitioner cannot be allowed to escape from his liability of making payment of maintenance to the respondent. The order passed by the Family Court is just and proper which requires no interference of this Court.

¶17

Accordingly, the instant petition as well as the stay application stand rejected.

¶18

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶19

Aayush Sharma/23

Lakhan S/O Late Shri Rambharos B/C Harijan v. Chandana W/O Shri Lakhan D/O Mangatram B/C Harijan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lakhan S/O Late Shri Rambharos B/C Harijan v. Chandana W/O Shri Lakhan D/O Mangatram B/C Harijan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shyam Singh Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Sonu @ Kamlesh S/O Omprakash Vs State of Rajasthan

Ashish Kumar @ Nefu Dhobi S/O Chandraprakash Vs State of Rajasthan

Kalpana Verma D/O Shri Radhey B/C Jatav Vs State of Rajasthan

Vishal @ Haboo S/O Shri Ganesh Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Bajrang Singh S/O Moolsingh Vs State of Rajasthan