AJAY ROHIT Vs. JYOTI ROHIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision is directed against order dated 18.8.2015 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Damoh in M.J.C. No.433/2015, whereby the application for maintenance filed on behalf of respondent no.2 Mahima Rohit was allowed and the petitioner was directed to pay Rs.2000/- per month by way of maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. to respondent Mahima from the date of application, i.e., 21.9.2011.

(2.) The facts giving rise to this criminal revision may be summarized as hereunder: Respondent No.2 Mahima Rohit is five years old daughter of petitioner Ajay Rohit. Petitioner Ajay had married respondent No.1 Jyoti Rohit by Hindu rites. Respondent No.2 Mahima was born in the wedlock on 12.11.2009. During the pendency of the case, respondent No.1 Jyoti Rohit, mother of respondent No.2 Mahima, expired; therefore, by order dated 28.1.2015 passed by the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Damoh, Ramesh Rohit, maternal grand-father of respondent No.2 Mahima Rohit, was substituted as respondent No.1 and guardian of respondent No.2 Mahima. After the trial, the Principal Judge, Family Court, Damoh directed petitioner Ajay to pay maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. to respondent Mahima Rohit @ Rs.2000/- per month from the date of the application, i.e., 21.9.2011. It was also directed that the interim maintenance paid by the petitioner to respondent No.2 shall be adjusted.

(3.) It is not in dispute that respondent No.2 Mahima is daughter of petitioner Ajay Rohit. It is also not in dispute that her mother Jyoti Rohit has since expired and the respondent No.2 Mahima Rohit, at present, is living with her maternal grand-father Ramesh Rohit, who has been appointed her guardian for the purpose of present proceedings. Petitioner Ajay had also admitted during his cross-examination that he has since married one Nisha Raj, who is at present living with him as his wife. It is also admitted position in the case that the petitioner has filed an application under Section 7 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 for the custody of respondent No.2 which is still pending. He has also admitted in his cross examination that he earns Rs.14,700/- per month as a teacher in a government school.