Dismissed

Hemant Gurjar S/O Sh. Surajmal v. Nisha W/O Hemant Gurjar

Rajasthan HC16 May 2024CRLR/229/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court maintained that an order granting interim maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. is interlocutory and does not finally decide the parties' rights. Consequently, the court held that a revision under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. or against the Family Court was not maintainable.

What did the court decide?

The revision petition was dismissed as not maintainable.

Hemant Gurjar S/O Sh. Surajmal Vs Nisha W/O Hemant… — Maintenance and Alimony | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:23221]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 229/2021

¶4

Hemant Gurjar S/o Sh. Surajmal, R/o Village Bhojyakhedi Tehsil Anta, Baran Raj

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Nisha W/o Hemant Gurjar, R/o Near Chota Ramdawara, Kishorepura, Kota Raj

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) For Respondent(s)

¶10

: Mr. Nitin Kumar Sharma, Advocate

¶11

: None present

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order

¶13

16/05/2024 :

¶14

Instant revision petition under Section 397 r/w Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been preferred on behalf of petitioner against the impugned order dt.21.01.2021 passed by Judge, Family Court, No.1, Kota, in Criminal Case No.1169/2020 whereby the application filed by respondent for interim maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. was allowed, while awarding interim maintenance @ Rs.5000/- per month in favour of respondent from the date of filing of original application i.e. 14.08.2020 till its disposal.

¶15

Submissions of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner are that the ld. Family Court had awarded the amount of interim maintenance on higher side from the date of original application till its disposal for interim maintenance without assigning any reason, therefore, the impugned order deserves to be quashed & set aside.

¶16

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Perused the impugned order as well as the material made available on record.

(2 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JP:23221]

[CRLR-229/2021]

The only point arising for our consideration is whether the order of interim maintenance passed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. is an interlocutory order or not?

¶21

Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Madhu Limaye Vs. State of Maharashtra, reported in (1977)4 SCC 551, has held that if an order is passed in a pending proceeding or a trial and it does not terminate the proceeding finally & rights, and liabilities of the parties are not decided in finality, then that order shall be considered as an interlocutory order.

¶22

Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Vishal Kochar Vs. Smt. Pulkit Sahni & Another, reported in 2022 (4) RLW 2784 (Raj.) in Para 19, has held as under :-

¶23

“19. The Co-ordinate Benches of this Court in the cases of Chhotu Singh vs Basanti, (RLW 2003(1) 114), and in Anshul Kulshresth Vs. Smt. Swarnima and Another, (RLW 2019 (1) 610) have also considered that an order of interim maintenance passed under Section 125 of CrPC is an interlocutory order. In the case of Anshul Kulshreshth (supra), which is compatible with the above reasonings, reads as :-

¶24

"13. There are differing views of different High Courts, Punjab & Haryana High Court are of view that interim maintenance order is not an interlocutory order, whereas Calcutta @ Madhya Pradesh High Court are of the view that interim maintenance order is an interlocutory order but this court is bound by the decision of the Rajasthan High Court "Chhotu Singh vs Smt. Basanti & Ors." (Supra) & Minor Anu vs Ratan Lla Sharma" (Supra), wherein grant of interim maintenance is held to be an interlocutory order.

¶25

14. Since the interim maintenance order continues till the final decision of an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and the decision of an interim application does not decide the rights and liabilities of the parties, it cannot be considered to be a final order as to give rights to the parties to move a revision petition. Hence, the revision petition is not maintainable."

¶26

Division Bench of this Court in the case of Anu vs Ratanlal, reported in RLR 1993(1) 125 and the Co-ordinate Benches of this Court in the cases of Vishal Kochar (supra) , Chhotu Singh (supra) and in Anshul Kulshreshth (supra), have categorically held that the order of interim maintenance passed in pending application under Section 125 of CrPC is an interlocutory order.

[2024:RJ-JP:23221]

[CRLR-229/2021]

(3 of 3)

It is also pertinent to mention here that Section 19 (1) & (4) of the Family Court Act, 1984 provides that no appeal or revision shall lie against any interlocutory order passed by the Family Court. The impugned order dated 21.01.2021 is passed by the Family Court, No.1, Kota empowered under the Family Court Act, 1984, therefore such revision petition is not maintainable in the light of these provisions also.

¶31

An order of interim maintenance passed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. by any Family Court or Magistrate, during the pendency of the proceeding, remains effective up to the final order only and does not decide the rights and liabilities of the parties in finality.

¶32

In view of the order passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Vishal Kochar (supra), the case-laws cited herein-above and the settled legal position, this Court is of the view that the impugned order dated 21.01.2021 passed by Judge, Family Court, No.1, Kota regarding interim maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. is an interlocutory order, hence, the revision petition deserves to be dismissed being not maintainable, either under Section 397/401 of Cr.P.C. or under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act.

¶33

Consequently, the present revision petition is dismissed as not maintainable.

¶34

Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.

¶35

(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J.

¶36

ASHOK/

Hemant Gurjar S/O Sh. Surajmal v. Nisha W/O Hemant Gurjar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hemant Gurjar S/O Sh. Surajmal v. Nisha W/O Hemant Gurjar

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

Maharaj Singh S/O Fooliram Gurjar Vs Sukhveer Singh S/O Man Singh Gurjar

Manish S/O Satyabhan Jat Vs State of Rajasthan

Avish Kumar @ Avinash S/O Shri Ramavtar @ Ramotar Vs State of Rajasthan

Vijendra S/O Shri Dayachand B/C Jat Vs State of Rajasthan

Karan Singh Son of Shri Narayan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Chhuttan Lal Saini Son of Ramlal Vs State of Rajasthan