Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 777 (RAJ)

Chandra Kalla v. State of Rajasthan

2013-04-18

SANDEEP MEHTA

body2013
JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Ms. Chandra Kalla, who was married to Pradeep Kumar, applied for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Sujangarh accepted the application vide order dated 5.11.2007 and directed Pradeep Kumar to make payment of Rs. 1,000/- per month as maintenance to Chandra Kalla. Both the parties preferred two separate revisions against the said order of the learned Magistrate. Chandra Kalla sought enhancement in the amount of maintenance whilst Pradeep Kumar assailed the order whereby maintenance had been granted to Chandra Kalla. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sujangarh vide order dated 15.7.2008 accepted the revision filed by Chandra Kalla and enhanced the amount of maintenance to Rs. 1,250/- per month and simultaneously, the revision filed by Pradeep Kumar was rejected. 3. Pradeep Kumar immediately and timely challenged the orders passed by the subordinate courts by way of S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 1021/2008 whereas Chandra Kalla has approached this Court against the same impugned orders in the year 2013 by way of S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 11/2013. 4. Learned counsel for Chandra Kalla contended that Chandra Kalla had claimed maintenance from Pradeep Kumar at a rate of Rs. 2,500/- per month and thus, the trial court as well as the revisional court have committed a grave error in refusing to grant her maintenance at the said rate. She thus submitted that the amount of maintenance payable to Chandra Kalla deserves to be enhanced. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for Pradeep Kumar contended that Pradeep Kumar filed an application for divorce against Chandra Kalla in the District Court, Bikaner being Divorce Application No. 255/2004. The said divorce application has been decreed by judgment dated 2.2.2005 whereby the learned District Judge granted divorce to Pradeep Kumar on the ground of desertion. Learned counsel thus relying on the judgments of this Court in the cases of Harjeet Singh v. Smt. Guddi reported in RLR 1987 (1) 520 ; Narain Lal v. Smt. Diwali & anr. The said divorce application has been decreed by judgment dated 2.2.2005 whereby the learned District Judge granted divorce to Pradeep Kumar on the ground of desertion. Learned counsel thus relying on the judgments of this Court in the cases of Harjeet Singh v. Smt. Guddi reported in RLR 1987 (1) 520 ; Narain Lal v. Smt. Diwali & anr. reported in 1994 Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 426 and Mahendra Kumar v. Shimla reported in 2006(1) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 854 , submitted that as the wife deserted the husband without any justification, she precluded from claiming maintenance in view of Section 125(4) Cr.P.C. He further contended that as the decree of divorce granted in favour of Pradeep Kumar on the ground of desertion has not been challenged and, therefore, Chandra Kalla is not entitled to receive any maintenance from Pradeep Kumar. 6. Learned counsel for Chandra Kalla is not in a position to dispute the fact that the judgment of divorce passed in favour of Pradeep Kumar on the ground of desertion has not been challenged by Chandra Kalla in any Court. 7. Heard and considered the arguments advanced at the bar and perused the orders impugned as well as the record. 8. In view of the aforesaid undisputed scenario and in view of the salutary provision of Section 125(4) Cr.P.C. which prohibits the wife from receiving maintenance if she has refused to live with the husband without any justification, this Court is of the opinion that as a competent court has granted decree of divorce in favour of Pradeep Kumar on the ground of desertion committed by Chandra Kalla, she is not entitled to receive any maintenance from Pradeep Kumar.Resultantly, S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 1021/2008 filed by Pradeep Kumar is hereby allowed and S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 11/2013 filed by Chandra Kalla is hereby dismissed. The order dated 5.11.2007 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Sujangarh in case no. 84/2004 granting maintenance to Ms. Chandra Kalla at a rate of Rs. 1,000/- per month as well as the order dated 15.7.2008 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sujangarh enhancing the said maintenance to a sum of Rs. 1,250/- per month, are hereby quashed.Stay petition no. 302/2012 stands disposed of.Record be sent back forthwith.Petition No. 11/2012 dismissed/Petition No. 1021/2008. *******