SMT. SAPNA SHRIVASTAVA Vs. SHIV OM SHRIVASTAVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Revision under Sections 397 , 401 of Cr.P.C. has been filed against the order dated 6/9/2014 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Guna in M.Cr.C. No.83/2014, by which the application filed by the applicant under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. has been dismissed.

(2.) The necessary facts for the disposal of the present application in short are that the applicant filed an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. on the ground that she is the legally wedded wife of the respondent having married to him on 13/4/2012 as per Hindu rites and rituals. Immediately after the marriage the respondent started harassing the applicant because of non-fulfillment of their demand of dowry. The respondent and his family members started passing taunts and harassing the applicant. Under compulsion and by beating the applicant, they also obtained signatures of the applicant on various documents and stamp papers. Whenever the applicant requested the respondent to allow her to go to her parents house, she was not allowed by the respondent. When the brother and the uncle of the applicant had come to take her with them, then the respondent had misbehaved with them and refused to send the applicant with them. With great difficulties, after obtaining the signatures of the applicant on some written documents and stamp papers as well as the signatures of her brother and uncle the applicant was allowed to go back to her parents' home. The applicant is an unemployed lady and has no source of income and is unable to maintain herself, whereas the respondent belongs to a high class society. The respondent is having private house and irrigated lands. He is a practicing lawyer and his monthly income as a lawyer is around Rs.20,000/- per month. The total income of the respondent is around Rs.8-10 lacs per year and, therefore, a prayer was made for grant of Rs.20,000/- per month by way of maintenance.

(3.) The respondent filed his reply and denied the allegations. It is mentioned that on 25/6/2012 the respondent was out of station and when he came back, then he come to know that the applicant has gone to her parents' house on the pretext that her father is not keeping well. The respondent went to her parents' house on 8/7/2012 for taking her back, but she refused to come back. The allegations of harassment or ill-treatment were denied. The allegations of obtaining signatures on the stamp papers or some written documents were also denied. It was mentioned that the respondent is ready and willing to keep the applicant with him and accordingly, he has also filed an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act. It was further stated that the respondent is seriously ill for the last about one year and, therefore, he is not able to practice as a lawyer.