Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 740 (RAJ)

Ruchika Sharma v. Sanjay Sharma

2019-03-06

MANOJ KUMAR GARG

body2019
JUDGMENT : Manoj Kumar Garg, J. 1. Heard the learned counsels for the parties. 2. The present revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 21.06.2018 in Criminal Misc Case No. 296/2017 whereby, learned Judge Family Court No. 2, Bikaner allowed the application filed by the petitioner under Section 125 Cr.P.C. directing the respondent to pay maintenance of Rs. 4000/- per month to petitioner. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the marriage of the petitioner and respondent No. 2 was solemnized as per Hindu rites on 11.02.2005 at Bikaner and out of the said wedlock, two children were born. The petitioner filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. before the court below and stated that after few years, the respondent and his family members started harassing the petitioner and committed grave cruelty demanding dowry. It was stated that the respondent is a heavy drunkard and used to beat the petitioner after consuming liquor. On 08.07.2014, the respondent committed a cruel assault on the petitioner and complaint in this regard was made by the petitioner with Mahila Police station. Later on the respondent filed a divorce petition and restrained the petitioner from meeting her children. Thus, by filing the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. the petitioner demanded maintenance of sum of Rs. 10,000/- per month as the respondent is working as employee in the District Court, Bikaner. However, the learned Family court awarded a meagre sum of Rs. 4,000/- per month. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a poor lady having no independent source of income whereas, the respondent is working on the post of Class IV employee in District Court and as per salary certificate issued by the Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate No. 3, Bikaner, the respondent is earning a sum of Rs. 33,119/- per month, therefore, the amount of maintenance may be adequately enhanced. 5. Per contra, counsel for the respondent submits that although he is working on the post of Class IV employee and earning a sum of Rs. 33,119/- but he has to look after his old parents and he is not in a position to pay more than the amount awarded by the Family Court. 5. Per contra, counsel for the respondent submits that although he is working on the post of Class IV employee and earning a sum of Rs. 33,119/- but he has to look after his old parents and he is not in a position to pay more than the amount awarded by the Family Court. It is argued that the respondent is regularly paying the amount of maintenance awarded by the Family Court, therefore, no case is made out for enhancement of the maintenance amount awarded by the Family Court. It is also submitted that the petitioner has filed the petition only with a view to harass the respondent. 6. I have considered the rival arguments so also carefully scanned the entire record. 7. A holistic reading of the provisions of Section 125 Cr.P.C. would clearly reveal that the responsibility and liability of a person to maintain his wife, children and parents rests on the condition that if any person having sufficient means neglects or refuses to maintain them (wife, children, parents), he can be ordered to make a monthly allowance for maintenance of his wife or child or parents at such monthly rate. In the instant case, on perusal of the record, it is evident that the respondent is working on the post of Class IV employee in District Court, Bikaner and earning a sum of Rs. 33,119/- whereas, the petitioner is a young lady of 32 years of age and not having any independent source of income. The learned Family Court has awarded Rs. 4000/- per month as maintenance. Looking to the necessities of life, price index which is rising by leaps and bounds every day and other factors, Rs. 4000/- per month seems to be on the lower side and same is liable to be enhanced. 8. Accordingly, the amount of maintenance awarded by the Family Court No. 2, Bikaner vide order dated 21.06.2018 is enhanced from Rs. 4,000/- to Rs. 7,000/- per month from the date of passing of this order. It is not disputed that the respondent has paid the amount of maintenance to the petitioner till date, therefore, the enhanced amount of maintenance shall be now payable to the petitioner from today. The revision petition stands disposed of.