Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 350 (CHH)

MANJARI DEWANGAN v. HEMANT DEW ANGAN

2009-12-02

PRITINKER DIWAKER

body2009
ORDER 1. Heard. 2. This revision is directed against the impugned order dated 12-3-2008 passed by the Family Court, Raigarh in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 125/ 2007 dismissing the application as filed by the applicant/wife under Section 125 Cr.P.C. seeking Rs.3,000/- per month from the non-applicant/husband towards her maintenance. 3. As per the case of the applicant/wife, her marriage was solemnized with the non-applicant/husband on 11-5-2005 and even after marriage both were residing at Raigarh town itself. It has been alleged by the applicant/wife that the non-applicant/husband is working as a Chemist in one of the steel companies at Raigarh and is getting Rs. 7,000/- per month. It has been further alleged that the non-applicant/husband is also earning Rs.3,000/- per month as rent from his house. It is the further case of the applicant/wife that for about 1 ½ years she lived with the non-applicant/husband and in between she also used to visit her parents' house. She has stated that immediately after her marriage, she was subjected to cruelty by her husband and mother-in-law for bringing less dowry. She has also stated that after about 1 month of her marriage, she became pregnant but unfortunately miscarriage took place. She has stated that after about 3 months again she became pregnant but thereafter again miscarriage took place and at the time of her second pregnancy she was subjected to torture by her mother-in-law and she was also given blow on her stomach, as a result of which, she delivered a dead baby. She has stated that when her husband and in-laws exceeded their limits, a report was lodged in the police station and since then she is residing with her parents. She has further stated that earlier also she was subjected to cruelty and thereafter she and her husband started living separately but there too she was subjected to cruelty by her husband. She has stated that as she is not in a position to maintain herself, she be given Rs.3,000/- per month towards the maintenance amount. 4. In support of her case, the applicant/wife has examined Durga Prasad (A.W.-2), who is father of the applicant, Yogendra (A.W.-3), brother-in-law of the applicant, Laxmibai (A.W.-4), mother of the applicant. All these witnesses have stated that the applicant was subjected to cruelty and there was dispute between the applicant and her husband. 5. 4. In support of her case, the applicant/wife has examined Durga Prasad (A.W.-2), who is father of the applicant, Yogendra (A.W.-3), brother-in-law of the applicant, Laxmibai (A.W.-4), mother of the applicant. All these witnesses have stated that the applicant was subjected to cruelty and there was dispute between the applicant and her husband. 5. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant/wife is that the Court below has erred in law in refusing the entire claim of the applicant/wife, the findings as given by the Court below are perverse and the applicant/wife is living in pathetic condition and, therefore, she is entitled for maintenance of Rs.3,000/- per month from the non-applicant/husband. 6. Opposing the claim of the applicant/wife, it has been argued by learned counsel for the non-applicant/husband that the present is a case where the non-applicant/husband had tried his level best to keep the applicant/wife happy, but it is the applicant/wife who was not interested to live with him. He submits that now the non-applicant/husband is also not interested to keep the applicant/wife with him and a divorce petition has also been filed by him before the competent Court. In his Court statement the non-applicant/husband Hemant (N.A. W. -1) has denied all the allegations as levelled by the applicant/wife and has stated that it is the misbehaviour of the applicant/wife which is the main cause for the dispute and she is in a habit of making false allegations against him and his mother. Similar statement is made by Padam Kumar Dewangan (NA W.-2), father of the non-applicant and Kartik Ram Dewangan (N.A.W.3), uncle of the non-applicant, Gopal Prasad Dewangan (N.A.W.-4), a local resident and Kuldeep Singh Saluja (N.A.W.-5), another local resident. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record including the impugned order. From the evidence on record what emerges is that the applicant/wife is unable to maintain herself She is living separately for sufficient reason that is her subjection to cruelty by her husband and moreover as categorically stated by learned counsel for the non-applicant/husband before this Court the non-applicant/husband is not interested to keep her with him and a divorce petition has also been filed by him before the competent Court. 8. At this stage, learned counsel for the parties informed this Court that the non-applicant/husband is at present working as Shiksha Karmi Class-I after leaving his earlier job of Chemist. 8. At this stage, learned counsel for the parties informed this Court that the non-applicant/husband is at present working as Shiksha Karmi Class-I after leaving his earlier job of Chemist. It has been informed by learned counsel for the applicant/wife that present salary of the non-applicant/husband is about Rs.9,000/- per month and, therefore, the applicant/wife is entitled for Rs.3,000/- per month towards her maintenance. Per contra, learned counsel for the non-applicant/ husband submits that the non-applicant/husband has other family responsibilities also and, therefore, it will be difficult for him to pay Rs.3,000/- per month. 9. Considering the totality of the facts and the evidence adduced by the parties, this Court is of the view that the applicant/wife is entitled for Rs.2,000/per month from the non-applicant/husband towards her maintenance with effect from today. 10. In the result, the impugned order of the Family Court is set aside. The criminal revision is partly allowed. It is directed that the non-applicant/husband shall pay Rs.2,000/- per month towards maintenance of the applicant/wife with effect from today. This amount includes the amount of interim maintenance awarded by the Court below, if any. The non-applicant/husband shall also pay Rs. 1,000/- to the applicant/wife as cost of this litigation. Revision Allowed.