Research › Search › Judgment

Telangana High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 542 (TS)

V. Raghu v. State of Telangana

2023-07-31

K.SURENDER

body2023
ORDER : This revision is filed by the petitioner-husband, challenging the order of the Family Court Judge granting maintenance to the wife. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The 2nd respondent-wife filed an application before the Family Court alleging that their marriage had taken place on 16.05.2013 and at the time of marriage cash, gold and silver articles were given as dowry. Thereafter, the petitioner-husband and in-laws started harassing her. Prior to ‘Rakhi Pournami’ in the year 2013, her husband and in-laws quarreled with her and forced her to go to her parents house and also insisted that she gives divorce to the petitioner herein who is her husband. They tried to strangulate her and also tried to kill her by pouring kerosene on her. On 26.12.2013 the wife became ill due to the torture of the husband and in-laws. The parents of the 2nd respondent- wife were called to take her. The husband and in-laws informed that unless additional dowry of Rs.5 lakhs was given, the wife should not enter in their residence. Several attempts were made to convince the husband and in-laws to take back the 2nd respondent-wife. However, there was no response for which reason criminal complaint was filed. The said complaint was registered under Section 498-A, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 4. Learned trial Court Judge found that the 2nd respondent-wife was cheated with cruelty. The petitioner-husband has the responsibility to maintain her. The Court further found that the salary of the petitioner-husband was approximately Rs.20,000/- per month. The Family Court Judge deemed it appropriate to fix the maintenance @ Rs.5,000/- per month from the date of petition till the date of order and thereafter @ Rs.8,000/-per month. 6. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner-husband would submit that the family Court Judge failed to consider that the wife had deserted the petitioner-husband without justifiable cause. False allegations are made that she was forced to go to her parent’s house. In fact, from the evidence it is apparent that the 2nd respondent-wife has deserted the husband. When the 2nd respondent-wife has voluntarily left and deserted the husband, the question of granting maintenance does not arise. The Family Court Judge had committed an error in granting Rs.8,000/- as maintenance to the wife when admittedly the husband was earning an amount of Rs.20,000/- per month. When the 2nd respondent-wife has voluntarily left and deserted the husband, the question of granting maintenance does not arise. The Family Court Judge had committed an error in granting Rs.8,000/- as maintenance to the wife when admittedly the husband was earning an amount of Rs.20,000/- per month. It is further on record that the petitioner-husband has old ailing parents to look after. If half of the salary is given to the wife it is difficult for the husband and his ailing parents to survive. They too need medical attention and have to pay rent for the home and also feed themselves. Three persons cannot live with Rs.12,000/- per month. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-wife would submit that only on account of the harassment meted out by the husband and his parents, the respondent-wife was forced to stay away. There is no reason as to why the wife stayed away from the husband who was married only few months prior to criminal complaint being filed and marriage was performed giving dowry of Rs.5 lakhs and also gold. 8. The Court has to balance the situation to arrive at the reasonable maintenance that can be granted to the wife. No doubt it is the duty of the husband to maintain the wife. However, the court shall also take into consideration the dependents on the husband and also prevailing situation. In the present case, as on the date of passing order, the Family Court Judge came to conclusion that the salary of the husband was Rs.20,000/-. The husband has two old aged parents and will not be in a position to live reasonably with an amount of Rs.12,000/-. 9. In view of the facts and circumstances, evenly considering the situation, this Court deems it appropriate to reduce the maintenance to Rs.6,000/- per month from August, 2023 to the 2nd respondent-wife. 10. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is partly allowed. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.